Ubuntu to ditch Unity and use GNOME Desktop

[Xanthe]

I tried using Fedora one time...Worst desktop environment I ever used. Now I can proudly say that Ubuntu will be my least favorite distro!

 

[sp3off]

I'm not that surprised, Unity was kinda bizarre and tried to be as easy at it could, but GNOME is better esthetically and at using it.

(it even looks like a Mac interface, that's also why I like it xD)

 

[jurassicplayer]

lol 14 year old noob here , can someone please explain what systemd is?

Systemd is like upstart or openRC or SysVInit. It's like the bridge to get from kernel to userspace at boot. Supposedly it can manage daemons and things that should be started around boot time. Pretty much, if you don't know it, then it really doesn't make any difference what you are using.

 

[Roify]

I have been a harden Linux user for nearly 12 years now and I am actually one of the most well known Linux users on the forums. I am very much well aware of what systemd and what does.
That being said, I don't personally hate it and often just see more posts of people hating it because it's systemd.

lmao no offense but what was your problem then except telling me your a linux pro ?
I mean I didnt hate on it , I just asked what it does....

 

[Kingy]

1. Oh boy, they're ditching Unity! This is grea-
2. GNOME 3 oh. oh no.

 

[The Catboy]

lmao no offense but what was your problem then except telling me your a linux pro ?
I mean I didnt hate on it , I just asked what it does....

Ohhh~ I completely misunderstood your post. I do apologize for that misunderstanding and I hope I didn't discourage you. You see, I thought you were directing that comment at me, once again, I do apologize for that misunderstanding.

Systemd is like upstart or openRC or SysVInit. It's like the bridge to get from kernel to userspace at boot. Supposedly it can manage daemons and things that should be started around boot time. Pretty much, if you don't know it, then it really doesn't make any difference what you are using.

This^
Or from Wikipedia (because I am horrible at breaking things down)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systemd

 

[Roify]

1. Oh boy, they're ditching Unity! This is grea-
2. GNOME 3 oh. oh no.

lol if they would use another de like cinnamon it would

Ohhh~ I completely misunderstood your post. I do apologize for that misunderstanding and I hope I didn't discourage you. You see, I thought you were directing that comment at me, once again, I do apologize for that misunderstanding.

This^
Or from Wikipedia (because I am horrible at breaking things down)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systemd

its fine, and thanks for apologizing so much you didnt need too.
Im trying to educate myself about tech since im 14 and trying to be very good in the future.
And when I dont know something, I really want to know it .

 

[Kingy]

lol if they would use another de like cinnamon it would

Cinnamon would be great, MATE would also be perfect, so it'd be like the good ol' days of Ewwbuntu (GNOME 2).

 

[sp3off]

KDE is getting good also, but i think it's already made (kubuntu if I remember well)

 

[Roify]

Cinnamon would be great, MATE would also be perfect, so it'd be like the good ol' days of Ewwbuntu (GNOME 2).

I agree cinnamon is a great DE, I dont like MATE that much tho .c..
I actually used ubuntu mate , and yes since yesterday I use cinnamon because you actually recommended it too me .
And I have too say im really happy with my manjaro installation.

 

[jurassicplayer]

I honestly don't really mind that Ubuntu is going back to GNOME. I frequently keep track of most of the desktop environments because...well I just do. I've never particularly liked Unity, and GNOME did really lose me initially, but now it looks alright. Every time there is a new post for KDE or GNOME I'm always like "ahh...that looks pretty neat, maybe one day I'll try it again."

On the Cinnamon/Mate thing, if Ubuntu went with either of those, it would kind of be a problem since that is sort of the entire point of Linux Mint.

Normally I just use openbox/tint2 since I like having slim-to-none titlebars and borders...but the other DEs always do tempt me.

 

[grossaffe]

@Roify : systemd is an init system, except that it's decided to be way more than an init system. It keeps growing and taking over other system responsibilities with bidirectional dependencies and thus killing the modularity of linux. It's a big monolith that, once integrated and puts its roots down will be huge pain in the ass to remove down the line as more and more utilities become dependant on it. It's nature of taking over all these responsibilities flies in the face of the Unix philosophy. "Write programs that do one thing and do it well. Write programs to work together. Write programs to handle text streams, because that is a universal interface."

There's also the question of security when it comes to systemd, as it is a gigantic monolith of code, some malicious code could get merged in and it could be difficult to find in hidden amongst literally half a million lines of code. And the compromise would be devastating as systemd controls PID 1. Continuing on this theme, the maintainers of systemd are RedHat employees; RedHat is deeply invested in government contracts, and the government has already shown to intentionally weaken security so that it has easier access to gathering supposedly secure data. And one last thing about the maintainers of systemd that should be noted is that at least one of them (can't remember if it was both) was banned from submitting code to the Linux kernel by Linus Torvalds.

There are a bunch of other issues related to systemd, but if you're interested, there's a compiled list of arguments: http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Arguments_against_systemd

Me, I just want a nice modular system without something coming in and taking a stranglehold of my OS.

 

[Deleted User]

I liked Unity, but I like GNOME even better

So it's a win win atleast for me

 

[The Catboy]

lol if they would use another de like cinnamon it would

its fine, and thanks for apologizing so much you didnt need too.
Im trying to educate myself about tech since im 14 and trying to be very good in the future.
And when I dont know something, I really want to know it .

I always try not to come off as rude or mean, essentially when someone is actually trying to learn.
And right now the systemd has really torn the Linux world apart, both literally (Debian was forked for Devuan,)and metaphorically. So you are going to hear rather strong feelings towards both sides of the argument.

 

[The Real Jdbye]

About time. Switching to Unity in the first place was a bad idea.

 

[Futurdreamz]

@Roify : systemd is an init system, except that it's decided to be way more than an init system. It keeps growing and taking over other system responsibilities with bidirectional dependencies and thus killing the modularity of linux. It's a big monolith that, once integrated and puts its roots down will be huge pain in the ass to remove down the line as more and more utilities become dependant on it. It's nature of taking over all these responsibilities flies in the face of the Unix philosophy. "Write programs that do one thing and do it well. Write programs to work together. Write programs to handle text streams, because that is a universal interface."

There's also the question of security when it comes to systemd, as it is a gigantic monolith of code, some malicious code could get merged in and it could be difficult to find in hidden amongst literally half a million lines of code. And the compromise would be devastating as systemd controls PID 1. Continuing on this theme, the maintainers of systemd are RedHat employees; RedHat is deeply invested in government contracts, and the government has already shown to intentionally weaken security so that it has easier access to gathering supposedly secure data. And one last thing about the maintainers of systemd that should be noted is that at least one of them (can't remember if it was both) was banned from submitting code to the Linux kernel by Linus Torvalds.

There are a bunch of other issues related to systemd, but if you're interested, there's a compiled list of arguments: http://without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Arguments_against_systemd

Me, I just want a nice modular system without something coming in and taking a stranglehold of my OS.

I think the problem is what is making SystemD popular in the first place. Linux is incredibly complicated with millions of things to keep track of. Modularity doesn't always help, as that Heartbleed thing last year showed that vital components can be forgotten and neglected. If you're just playing around it may be okay but it can be really bad if you find yourself not able to do something time sensitive because you have to sit down and learn how to fix the problem.

 

[grossaffe]

I think the problem is what is making SystemD popular in the first place. Linux is incredibly complicated with millions of things to keep track of. Modularity doesn't always help, as that Heartbleed thing last year showed that vital components can be forgotten and neglected. If you're just playing around it may be okay but it can be really bad if you find yourself not able to do something time sensitive because you have to sit down and learn how to fix the problem.

Fixing problems is all the worse on non-modular systems because when a problem arises, it's not just an isolated component that's broken that could be swapped out. You remove systemd and suddenly you've messed with login, udev, DNS, and who knows what else. Also on the note of dealing with issues, systemd stores its logs in a binary format rather than a the standard text format requiring you to use its tools to go through the logs rather than just piping through cat, tail, grep, and whatever other tools you already use for system logs.

One of the big gripes I have for systemd is it's trying to embed itself as an essential component; something to which there is no alternative. If everyone adopts systemd as the only option (which unfortunately the vast majority of major distros are doing) then it will be all that much more painful when the time comes to move on from it. Systemd came about because it was determined sysvinit was too archaic. How much of a bitch will it be to replace systemd when it becomes too archaic what with its tentacles spread out all over the system with bidirectional dependencies? It's short-sighted, in my opinion.

 

[Deleted User]

I've actually never understood the hatred towards systemd. I've been using systemd since it became a standard and never noticed a difference.

I had systemd refuse to boot Debian for me just because my external harddrive wasn't plugged in. It also would hang when I'd try to shut my laptop off unless I shut it off by pressing the power button, which is less annoying but still kinda annoying.

 

[The Catboy]

I had systemd refuse to boot Debian for me just because my external harddrive wasn't plugged in. It also would hang when I'd try to shut my laptop off unless I shut it off by pressing the power button, which is less annoying but still kinda annoying.

I had the same issue with Grub. Turns out it's a bad idea to keep the same drive I was backing my stuff up on and installing the OS.