Ubuntu GNOME 13.10

Note: I’ve done some edits to this review after getting feedback from readers. The initial version was too skewed by my own lack of enthusiasm for GNOME 3. I’ve added some content and bumped up the score to better reflect the overall value of Ubuntu GNOME 13.10 rather than my own feelings toward GNOME 3. Thanks to my readers for sharing their thoughts, my apologies for the earlier take on this distro.

Unity has caused an enormous amount of controversy in the Ubuntu community, with many hating it and some loving it. Fortunately, we are blessed with other desktop environments to use on top of the Ubuntu base. In addition to Lubuntu, Xubuntu and Kubuntu, we also have Ubuntu GNOME 13.10. That’s right, you can simply opt to run GNOME on top of Ubuntu instead of Unity.

GNOME 3 is definitely not my cup of tea. It is probably my least favorite Linux desktop, and it has gotten a lot of flack from various people including Linus Torvalds (who switched to Xfce but then switched back to GNOME 3 later). This guy sums up well some of the reasons why GNOME 3 has garnered such criticism.

However, I understand that GNOME 3 has those who appreciate it and prefer it. If you’re one of them then you will most likely enjoy Ubuntu GNOME 13.10. It blends the GNOME 3.8 desktop with Ubuntu very well.

Ubuntu GNOME 13.10 Classic Desktop
Ubuntu GNOME 13.10 Classic Desktop
Ubuntu GNOME 13.10 Classic Application Menu
Ubuntu GNOME 13.10 Classic Application Menu

My preference in this release is GNOME Classic. GNOME Classic is more or less GNOME as it used to be, and I found using it to be much more enjoyable than GNOME 3. Your mileage may vary, however.

Whatever your preference, it’s easy to switch between GNOME 3.8 and GNOME Classic by changing the session at the login screen.

Ubuntu GNOME 13.10 Login Menu
Ubuntu GNOME 13.10 Login Menu

What’s New in Ubuntu GNOME 13.10
Here’s a sample of the new features in this release:

Most of GNOME 3.8 is included
Artwork improvements
GNOME Classic included
Ubuntu Online Account no longer included (you have to install it if you want it)

System Requirements for Ubuntu GNOME 13.10
Here’s what you’ll need to run this distro:

The Minimum System Requirement for Ubuntu GNOME is 1 GB of RAM. It is recommended to have more. If you have an old machine, you may consider other alternatives like Lubuntu.

Ubuntu GNOME 13.10 Download
You can download Ubuntu GNOME 13.10 from this page. The file I downloaded weighed in at 907 MB. You can get Ubuntu GNOME 3.10 in 32-bit or 64-bit versions. I opted to use the 64-bit version for this review.

If you’re a distrohopper then you might want to try it in a virtual machine via VirtualBox before running it on real hardware.

Ubuntu GNOME 13.10 Installation
Ubuntu GNOME 13.10 obviously uses the Ubuntu installer, which means it is very fast and easy to install. I had no problems installing it. It’s also a live distro, so you can run it off a disc before doing an install. Be sure to click the check boxes during the install to download updates and install third party software.

Ubuntu GNOME 13.10 Try or Install
Ubuntu GNOME 13.10 Try or Install
Ubuntu GNOME 13.10 Prepare Install
Ubuntu GNOME 13.10 Prepare Install
Ubuntu GNOME 13.10 Install Type
Ubuntu GNOME 13.10 Install Type
Ubuntu GNOME 13.10 Install Slideshow
Ubuntu GNOME 13.10 Install Slideshow

The Ubuntu GNOME 13.10 Desktop

Pages: First | 1 | 2 | 3 | Next | Last

53 thoughts on “Ubuntu GNOME 13.10

  1. Having used Windows through to win 7 for many years and tried Linux on and off through the years but not finding any linux dist to suit my needs until now over the last month or so I have downloaded and tried many linux variants but focusing on Debian based Ubuntu systems Mint 16 petra Ubuntu 12.04 lts Ubuntu 12.10 through to the latest Ubuntu release trying each dist more than once to find a focus in which to settle on to suit my needs I have settled on Ubuntu Gnome 13.10 64 bit as it suits my needs there have been a couple of problems to sort but they have all had problems to sort but in saying that Ubuntu Gnome has been the most stable for me and the most easy to use for me it suits my purpose .Just being able to do that pick and choose till you find what suits your needs is absolute and in taking this journey I have found that there is no such thing as perfect only perfect intentions but settling on what suits your needs and Ubuntu Gnome 13.10 64 bit suits mine
    so I dont understand what all this fuss is about isnt being able to make all these choices that what makes Linux great.Perhaps some people should take on Windows and enjoy all the choices you have NOT.

  2. To people commenting AND reviewer: who to hell wants to know how you feel about anything?
    >>de gustibus non est disputandum<<
    Just give me facts.
    The key for DE is: Can it be customized to my liking? That is what everybody wants to know.
    I didnt find answer to that in this article/comments.

  3. Not only is the review the worst review ever written, the author is digging his own grave by trying to please every tiny bit of criticism comments are throwing at him.

    So the author blew the roof of in a blunder. Haven’t we all tried that at some point in life? Please, Jim. STOP embarrassing yourself through people-pleasing the way you do. Please.

    I run Ubuntu Gnome 13.10 mixed with a very pre-alpha 14.04 as the basis for GNOME 3.10.1. It’s rock solid and beautiful to look at. GNOME 2.xx is history. Get over it. Unless off cause you want the ol’ FUD ’bout Linux ugliness to live on for ever. If you don’t like GNOME 3.x Don’t use it. It’s that simple.

    1. This is not the “worst review ever written”. It is an opinion piece with sharply divided interests. Jim has already backed off on his initial comments, acknowledging that some people prefer the most recent versions of GNOME, while others strongly dislike them.

      He is fair in his assessment and stating his opinion. He says that Ubuntu has many nice features: for instance, it is easy to install, easy to manage, is capable of running live, in a virtual instance, or installed. Furthermore, there are multiple alternatives, if people prefer one desktop or another.

      Stating an opinion that a particular desktop is not in his personal taste, yet acknowledging that others may not enjoy it does not make this work a disaster; it simply means that there are likely to be sharply differing opinions on what individuals like best.

      To me, what’s good is that Canonical, in their offerings, present multiple choices, and Linux, in a larger context, offer even more alternatives.

      Yes, there could be other articles discussing desktops, highlighting the pros and cons of each. Bruce Byfield, for example, often writes about GNOME, KDE, Unity, Xfce, and other desktops, comparing them. He also writes about office suites and compares their features too. That might be good companion reading for those who want to consider other alternatives or the viewpoints of other authors.

      Either way, Jim, as an editorial writer, is entitled to his own opinion, you are also entitled to state yours, and each person is entitled to form their own opinion.

      My opinion is that this is not a roof blowing blunder, it is an opinion, and nothing more than that.

      Linux and choice is good; when you like it, you use it, when you prefer something else, there are countless varieties to choose from, and many of them provide good value. GNOME 13.10 clearly provides value to you and some other people, but equally clearly, some people prefer to use other alternatives, and that’s what makes the great variety of choices valuable.

    2. Actually, the Gnome trademark is itself history. It used to rule the top 10 distros on distrowatch.org. In 2010, the year that 2.32 was released, Ubuntu, Mint, Debian, Fedora, all used Gnome 2 as their default desktop. In fact, 4 of the top 5 defaulted to Gnome 2. Today, as I write this, only one distro in the top 10 defaults to Gnome. (Yes, it’s the one you’d expect. And that distro has, itself toppled from its #2 spot in 2010 to #5 and falling, today. And is also taking steps do distance itself from Gnome (3) by bringing Cinnamon and MATE on board as credible options.)

      Mint dropped Gnome in favor of Cinnamon and MATE. Ubuntu dropped Gnome in favor of Unity. Debian dropped Gnome in favor of XFCE.

      It looks like the future likely belongs to Cinnamon and MATE. (Unless you really think Canonical is going to take the mobile phone market by storm, Ubuntu looks to be poised for a big fall; There’s a limit to even Shuttleworth’s patience.) But Gnome 3 has already entered the dustbin of history, along with the trademark of Gnome, itself. Fortunately, the spirit of Gnome 2 lives on in 2 other projects, and is being maintained and pushed forward by developers who listen to their users, and care more about that than in pushing forward their own personal “vision”.

      Gnome is the new XFree86.

  4. Jim its a sad day when a reviewer back track on a review. You were one of the best reviewers on the net, this review edited trashes every ounce of respect I had for you.
    Take my advice call it a day don’t write any more reviews.

    1. Sorry to hear that, mandog. I’ll keep writing reviews though. Even the most experienced reviewers can use a wakeup call at times from readers, and I got mine in this review.

      I think it’s important to step back sometimes and pay attention to what readers are saying. In this case I let my own dislike of GNOME adversely affect the content of the review, that was not a good decision on my part. I ought to have known that beforehand, but reviewers are human beings too and we can be affected by our own prejudices and preferences in a negative way.

      Anyway, I hope you’ll reconsider and check out some of the other reviews. Glad to have you here on DLR regardless.

      1. The best of all people learn from their mistakes. I think it’s clear that you have. Even the best news writers, editors, and anchor people find themselves in the position of writing retractions and making public apologies. Despite that, clearly there are still people that want you to make amends. I suggest you write a new, extra long, highly detailed review of Ubuntu GNOME 13.10. Be highly detailed regarding all of the components that make it what it is, and how they work together to make it up. Be intricately technical and objective. In the articles summary, be thorough and honest about what you like and don’t like – what you would like to see in improvements, only keep your emotions out of it. In doing so, perhaps you will find greater redemption.

        1. No need to defend yourself on this. While I didn’t happen to catch the original review, it’s easy enough to fill in that gap. You wrote a blunt, to the point review which called it like it was regarding the Gnome 3 shell disaster, perhaps neglecting to fill in some detail. The few people who still care about Gnome 3 felt butt-hurt about it, and used whatever scraps they could find to attack the reviewer. You added the necessary concrete arguments supporting your assessments. And now the Gnome 3 cheerleaders have run out of low-hanging fruit to throw at you. That makes them angry. Especially since they can’t actually counter your criticisms of the desktop they are cheer-leading for. So we’re hearing such ludicrous assertions as that supplying supplemental arguments to support your original position is unforgivable.

          As I said at the beginning, there is absolutely no need for you to feel that you have to defend yourself on this topic. Gnome 3 stinks. Most people who care at all recognize that fact. But there’s always going to be a cabal of of people who try to defend it. And what they lose in membership over time, they try to make up for via increased intensity of vehemence against those who point out Gnome 3’s problems.

          1. I am no friend to Ubuntu Gnome 3.10 or Ubuntu or Gnome in general, I used it for a couple of days and it was gone. I would use any other DE available before it, and I was one of the first people to complain – you really have to have read the original. This isn’t about cheerleaders and low hanging fruit, it’s about poor journalism and that article scraped the bottom. Jim is a public figure who’s journalistic integrity people put their trust in. His need to defend himself apologetically had to happen in order to preserve that integrity. I do believe that this is now out of proportion and his first apology should be accepted by all – as I did. My suggestion to write a whole new article was probably excessive – as far as I am concerned, he redeemed himself with his first apology way back when this happened. This is my last remark on a dead subject. It is now in the whiners court to not be babies and accept a genuine apology.

            EDIT: I would use it before Unity.

  5. So many negative comments… I’ve been running 13.10 with gnome 3.10 ever since they both came out, and after a little bit of struggle against the amd-catalyst drivers and setting up gnome 3.10 with all the extensions I wanted… well guess what, it runs a lot smoother than even Windows 7 on the same device.
    I use it as my daily OS, and even my girlfriend seems to like it, it hasn’t crashed, it hasn’t caused any problems so far, it handles 3D-games very well, and even metasploit seems to run just fine on it alongside a couple of virtual machines.
    Something tells me some people are a bit biased here.
    Gnome still rocks, and I still prefer it over the bloated and ugly KDE and Unity.

  6. Saucy 13.10 is so buggy and incompatible with half the programs in the repo that I about wanted to punch my screen. Its a tragic scene. You would think a little more effort went into it before release. If youre like me and love ubuntu but want something more stable go with 12.04.

    1. Judging from your displeasure with 13.10, it is clear to me that you neither carefully arranged mojo chicken bones prior to installation, nor burned goat entrails in a ceremonial fire after installation. Neither did I, and I totally hear you. I’m sorry to say, Ubuntu and GNOME are on life support right now.

  7. Okay ladies and gentlemen, the article has been re-written as of several days now. We can give the Jim bashing a rest. The remaining commentary that is unfavorable towards Ubuntu GNOME is not unfair and some of it is even backed up. Beyond that, it is an actual review now – albeit slim. The original article was a mistake that should not have happened, but I think Jim has realized that his words carry enough weight to put his credibility on the line. Nothing more to see, move along – unless you’re here to read the review.

  8. what’s wrong with criticizing gnome? there is nothing immature about that. however, wanting someone to write exactly what you want them to write is well… ridiculous. i find gnome to be immature, especially when compared to other DEs. the extensions might or might not work. i am still not sure if something doesn’t work just remove the code is a good idea, since before long there won’t be anything left to remove, except a weather app and map app. LOL!!!!! they really help me with my work.

    1. No, the reason this review sucks is because it’s a misguided bashfest. It’s simply an awful review. If he brought up great points then we wouldn’t be hating on this article. Instead it’s like reading a 12 year old crying because he didn’t get his way.

    2. Apparently you came along after the author re-wrote the article to try and save face. Read through all the comments and it will give you an idea of what it was like before the re-write. It was horribly biased – didn’t even try to hide it. It did not even review the distro, just bashed it. You really had to read the original article to understand why people are so up in arms. It was badly unprofessional. And I agree, there is nothing wrong with criticism – professional journalistic criticism, even if it’s bad – but he didn’t even try to write a review with a shred of honest integrity.

      1. Well I can understand that. Thanks for pointing out that the article was re-written. I find that a bit lame. Using Strike through in the original text and admitting being incorrect or perhaps biased might show others that just beefing on something isn’t a critical view, it’s just op-ed.

  9. Horrible post. Waste of my time to read it. If you don’t like Gnome 3, don’t review the latest version. Leave the review to those who can be unbiased.

  10. I do not like your review and I am not going to tell you why. I believe this comment is as useful for you as is your review for readers.

    I would strongly suggest you to change the title from “GNOME 3 still sucks” to “Jim doesn’t like GNOME 3”. It would have helped me not to end up here.

    1. Good point, I edited the title. Thanks for the feedback. Sorry it was a disappointment, you might want to check out some of the other reviews. I’ll give some thought to how I handle future reviews with GNOME 3.

      1. Congrats on discrediting your whole site. I came on here as someone who couldn’t care less about this or that DE, only seeking an honest review. Instead I got a quarter of a page of obvious condensed bias. I am not even a GNOME user, but I recognized your ‘review’ for what it is. This is my introduction to your work – to your site, and it is not flattering. I will not be back and I will spread the word as to how useless and baseless this place is. You know how the internet works, right?

        1. Hi John, please see the edit at the beginning of the review. I have updated it after reading the comments from readers. I appreciate you all taking the time to share your thoughts.

          In this case I goofed by letting my own lack of enthusiasm for GNOME 3 get in the way of the review. I’ve tried to fix that and made some changes to the review and the final score.

      2. Thank you. I am glad you appreciate the feedback from readers.

        As for GNOME 3, I really love it for its simplicity and the way it handles multiple desktops. What really bugs me, nonetheless, is the disappearance of universal access from the top menu bar in 3.8 release. Even thought I don’t really need it, (I used only on-screen-keyboard and zoom on lazy occasions when in bed with mouse and far away from keyboard and monitor),I believe this features should always be easily accessible for people with some kind of disabilities. It is like moving wheelchair ramp from main entrance to back door of building just because most of the people don’t need it.

  11. WTF? I came here because I followed a link to read a review about GNOME but all I’m getting is a childish rant with no real content or substance. If this is what you are about then this is not only my first time visiting desktoplinuxreview for information it is my last. Really lame – thanks for the non-info. I’ll check GNOME out for myself and see if it’s good or sucks. Maybe I’ll write a real review. You give it 2 out of 5, I give this article 0 out of 5.

  12. All fine and dandy but next time you review something could you, oh IDK, review it? This ‘review’ is largely a page of passing anecdotes with links to the official website if people actually want to learn something about it. I am not a GNOME fanboy, and usually don’t jump in to make comments like this, but I came here to read a review and what you are trying to pass off as a review is just pathetic in this case. It’s almost like you didn’t have to for a real review so you furiously typed out what you could. Next time you review something, take the time to review or don’t review it at all.

  13. Stop trying to use GNOME classic, it’s like people who try to bring back the Latin language. It worked for it’s time but it’s dead, Jim. Be grateful, the GNOME team cares enough to still give you something that resembles GNOME 2.0 when they frankly don’t have to support it anymore. The fact is, GNOME 3 is much better than GNOME 2. It just takes some getting used to, but once you learn the keyboard shortcuts you will be amazed at how much your efficiency at navigating the UI increases.

    1. Stop trying to use Gnome 3 shell. It’s like trying to bring a still-born baby back to life. It won’t work. It’s dead, and has taken Gnome 3 with it. Even Red Hat has now officially rejected it for RHEL 7. Cinnamon and MATE are the future. And the Gnome project is the new XFree86. A year from now, no one will care about it. 3 years from now most won’t even remember it. (Yeah, there used to be a desktop called “Gnome” which was very popular.)

  14. Come on Jim. I believe that you and Brian are trying to play people for fools with this review, and with your comments afterwards. You review something that you know you wouldn’t like and then recruited Brian to back you up. Do you really think that Gnome classic mode or Mate is the way to go. I suppose so if you don’t want people to even try ubuntuGNOME. It seems like you two are the only ones who don’t really like Gnome shell. Then again, how can you like or dislike something you two know nothing about. You and Brian need a little education. You cannot dump Gnome3 to run Gnome classic. I can’t believe that both of you are really that ignorant as to not know the difference between Gnome3 and the Gnome shell interface. Cinnamon is run on Gnome3, Gnome classic is run on Gnome3, Mate is an unstable fork of Gnome2 that really is developed by someone wanting to live in the past. (like XP users) You talked like you and Brian didn’t even know what Mate is. I really can’t believe this BS from either of you. What happened? The reviews and comments were not honest or accurate. From either of you. If you don’t like a certain user interface then so be it, but to ruin both of your reputations like this is so illogical. What is that saying Brian, “A great mind is a terrible thing to waste”? Well you two got put in the waste basket today. I bet the developers of antiX are quaking in their boots right now because of your writing. So sad. Try to be serious the next time you write a review.

    1. Actually the Cinnamon/MATE duo are the way to go. It’s clear at this point that Gnome 3 has no future. Cinnamon 2.0 is now completely free of legacy Gnome 2/3 dependencies and libraries, and they’ve left the plodding Gnome 3 devs in their dust. Meanwhile, MATE is there for places where a 3D requirement is a problem. e.g. I have ~100 users I’m moving from Gnome 2 to MATE. Gnome 3 is totally unsuitable for serving out over the WAN via NX, or any other remote desktop technology. It’s totally unsuitable for the current environment where Nuveau is the best we OSS option we have for the majority of desktops out there. And even when system requirements are met… let’s face it… Gnome 3 shell is unusable due to its UI brain trauma in addition to its technical failings.

      Don’t try to prop it up. Just let it die.

  15. A review that is not so much a review, but a vehicle for complaining about a DE. The end result is a foregone conclusion, so I’m not sure what the point is (apart from the aforementioned excuse to complain again about a DE you already know you don’t like going in).

    I installed it then added GNOME 3.10. Works fine. Probably end up going back to Manjaro w/OpenBox, which I really like, but I haven’t had any trouble with Ubuntu Gnome 13.10, and most people already know how they feel about a given DE, so if you like Gnome 3.8 or want to try 3.10, it is worth installing.

  16. Would be nice, just once, to see an actual review of *anything* Gnome that does not begin with “It sucks! I hate it!”. Why would I trust someone who starts out with that?

    Going on about whatever it is *you* don’t like is not a review. Neither is assuming readers share your opinion.

    Address Gnome Shell on its own terms, instead of trashing it because it isn’t Gnome 2. Otherwise, the net’s full of this kind of uninformative piling on.

    1. joncr on October 24, 2013 at 8:47 am

      Would be nice, just once, to see an actual review of *anything* Gnome that does not begin with “It sucks! I hate it!”. Why would I trust someone who starts out with that?

      Going on about whatever it is *you* don’t like is not a review. Neither is assuming readers share your opinion.

      Address Gnome Shell on its own terms, instead of trashing it because it isn’t Gnome 2. Otherwise, the net’s full of this kind of uninformative piling on.
      You won’t see such a thing because Gnome 3+ *DOES* suck. In fact, it sucks as badly as the design of the majority of 2010-2013 cars do. God, why would someone be stupid enough to design a car where you literally can’t see anything around you out of the side or rear windows?.

      The so-called Gnome 3 designers need to be shot just as dead as the idiots who designed these stupid-assed cars and trucks.

  17. Wasted an entire day trying to fix bugs regarding dual display installation.
    No way to set and get the right main monitor nor to give them the right position.
    It kept switching left / right on boot.
    I’ve been using linux for years now, being a web developer I’ve always been fascinated by the linux world and given it another chance and another and another, but there’s always something you’ve got to try to solve or hack instead of actually WORK(!), no matter the distro, release, desktop. Starting to get fed up.
    It doesn’t matter ‘open source’. If you do something do it well. If you can’t, leave it.

    1. If you’re trying to use dual monitor set-up, one VGA and the other DVI on amd radeonHD 7xxxm:

      Try adding the following line to your startup applications:

      xrandr –output VGA1 –auto –right-of LVDS1 –output VGA1 –auto –scale 1.0001×1.0001

      The login-screen will still flicker when using dual monitors, but once you log in, you’ll find this resolves your problem.

      The problem is not the Linux distro here, it’s the proprietary amd driver, ( I have no idea if it’s the same case with Nvidia-cards, I only have amd-hardware.) If AMD can’t be persuaded to actually put some effort in the linux support, this will continue to be a bug, sadly.
      Watch this space, as I’ll post a full tutorial on how to install and set-up dual monitors using the above mentioned hardware.

        1. Thank you for your advice. Gnome is actually giving me that issue on nVidia drivers. On the other computer, Linux Mint is smooth and consistent and guess what, same graphic card, same drivers.
          So, easiest way is to install mint again.
          Thanks a lot for taking the time to reply though.

  18. I find it amusing to read reviews of different Linux distros where everyone is bashing anything that is new or different. This is especially amusing, when “different” is always used as the biggest excuse for not trying Linux in the first place. I have tried various distros and desktops over the past ten years and I have changed my desktop a few times,too. I admit that sometimes getting used to different requires some effort as I get older.

    I was a longtime KDE3 user who defected to using Gnome 2 when KDE4 came along. I too, was horrified to learn that my beloved Gnome 2 interface was being replaced by first Unity and then Gnome Shell. I resigned myself to using Unity and was prepared to loath Gnome Shell after all I read about it. I have found Unity to be “OK” and I can use it without too many problems. Continuing my practice of constantly keeping up with various desktops. I also use Lubuntu, Xubuntu, Kubuntu and Bodhi occasionally.

    When Gnome Shell first became available for Ubuntu, I realized it was time for me to try it (even though I wouldn’t like it). When I did, I realized that it was actually better than Unity and easier to use. I persisted in using it and became so comfortable with it that I found myself preferring it to the point that it is now my primary desktop on almost all of my systems. In a nutshell, it allows me to do my thing and does not get in the way. After becoming used to using it, all other desktops seem archaic to me and require much more effort to accomplish the same tasks. Do older desktops have their place? Yes, they are easy for people who are used to the old menu click paradigm and in some instances run better on some hardware. Does Gnome Shell have a place? Yes! A Gnome Shell user knows when they are “all in” when they try to mouse to the top left corner on other systems!

    I am really proud of the effort the Ubuntu Gnome Team has put in to bring Gnome Shell to Ubuntu. I can even get Gnome Shell 3.10 through Gnome-Next PPA. I will not bash other desktops. Choice is what Linux is all about and I am glad to have so many choices. My choice is to use Ubuntu Gnome with Gnome Shell and I encourage everyone to at least give it a try. Who knows? Maybe, you will be surprised like I was!

  19. I don’t get why you’re devoting an entire distribution -review to bashing the desktop -environment that it is installed on it…

    Obviously, those who don’t like gnome 3.8 shouldn’t install Ubuntu Gnome 13.10, as it was specifically intended for people that prefer Gnome, which obviously isn’t you, Jim.

    I was very positively surprised to find about the Ubuntu Gnome project, as I must admit I hated Unity as well… too orange for my liking.

    Anyway, whenever I used to tweak gnome 2.x to suit my preferred way of working, I almost always ended up with a Mac OS -clone, including the fancy dock and all.
    After trying Gnome 3.x for the first time ( at first I thought it was fork of the original Gnome, adjusted for use on tablets. ) I really seemed to like it.
    Even after all the criticism it caused, I must say it worked a hell of a lot faster and easier than previous versions and with all the tweaks I require enabled, it’s close to a dream now, as far as I’m concerned.

    Even Linus Torvalds’ statement, saying that no one will ever adjust to moving the cursor to the upper left corner of the screen to get to the menu doesn’t make much sense to me. It used to be much slower having to click the menu-button ( also in the upper left corner, by default) to then proceed to look through the menu for the needed application…
    All it takes in Gnome shell, is moving your cursor to the upper left corner and simply type the name of the application you require.

    Windows are rendered very fast, applications seem to run very smoothly, and ..; well..; I’m a Linux user, f*ck the GUI, and give me a terminal. :-)

    It all comes down to personal taste, and whether you like gnome-shell or not, it’s up to you to decide what you do like and you’re always fee to install whatever desktop environment you want… Which is the entire point of GNU/Linux.

    So far, I believe Ubuntu Gnome 13.10 is very solid distribution, runs smoothly and can be adjusted to fit your needs with ease.

    What more could you want?

    So, might I suggest you write your reviews with a bit more open-mindedness the next time around?


    P.S. I upgraded to Gnome 3.10 while writing this, and that seems even smoother than 3.8. Maybe, I’ll write my own review later today. 😉

  20. Almost always disagree with Lynch on everything, so it is comforting to know I disagree with him on Ubuntu and Gnome as well. Gnome Shell 3.8 is the desktop manager and the distro is called Gnome Remix 13.10. It is polished and fast, and so easy even Jim Lynch should be able to use it. What you have here, folks, are called “Linux Snobs” who feel superior because they can write their own code. For the everyday person, Ubuntu Gnome Remix 13.10 supplies what we all really need from a computer operating system. First of all, it is usable. The interface stays out of the way but is easily available when you need it. Every tool you could possibly desire is easily available, either in the base install or in the software center. Second of all, it is blazing fast compared to any Microsoft product. It makes your laptop a joy to use again! Thirdly, it is stable and secure. You will find that these Linux Snobs will blast Canonical, the company that makes all versions of Ubuntu available to the world free for the download. The fact is that they have made a distro that is so easy to try, install and use that you could do it if you had never seen Linux in any form. One thing particularly great – when you boot up to the distro DVD, you will find that your wireless card is already detected and all you have to do is put in the key, and you can try the software and the desktop interface for yourself without installing it. It will be somewhat slow reading the DVD, of course, but everything works. Then, if you decide to install it, it will help you partition your hard drive and save your Windows install so that you can dual boot without a problem. If you are like me, you probably won’t have much need to boot into Windows once you get used to Ubuntu Gnome Remix 13.10. A free operating system which does everything you would expect and be easy and fun to use – how could it get any better. Pay no attention to the Linux Snobs – they like to pretend that using Linux is so hard that only really technical people can use it, which gives them a sense of superiority. And always, don’t forget to “Have fun!”

    1. GNOME Classic really got it a two, otherwise it might have been a one.

      This distro should probably use MATE and be renamed to Ubuntu 13.10 MATE or something like that. That would be the best thing for it, even better than GNOME Classic.

      1. We were indeed thinking the very same thing!

        I don’t suppose Dragonmouth will now think we are “brothers” or something like that, though, will he?

        (I sometimes thought the two of you could be brothers or family because you two like to “fight like cats and dogs”, but I know better)!

        We do have fun, don’t we? For me, I don’t take any of it too seriously; we are just toying around with stuff, sharing our opinions, and for me, I enjoy DIFFERING opinions just as much as someone agreeing with me.

        In fact, I’ve already been amused at some of the comments in the blogs of the reviews you’ve written this past week; it’s been FUN, hasn’t it? :-)

  21. So “perhaps” you have a bit of a hard time accepting GNOME 3.0, even in GNOME 3.8 form, eh? You’re not alone. I don’t even care for any form of GNOME all that much, but GNOME “Classic” is at least tolerable to me. The Mate and Cinnamon approaches developed by Mint are usable, and in LMDE form, they are not bad at all; I can live with them; I think it’s the MATE version I have installed in another partition.

    Real GNOME? Never really cared for it, and since GNOME 3 came out, the only times I even try it are to check and see if it’s gotten any better. Mate I can handle, true GNOME 3? I agree, it’s the worst desktop environment created; all of the other ones have at least one redeeming characteristic. GNOME 3? Well, I suppose if I can run something from it, that makes it workable, but why even have a desktop environment if all you are going to do is try to work AROUND it? No thanks; in that case, I’ll just use a window manager, such as IceWM, jwm, fvwm, fvwm-crystal, Openbox, etc.

    1. Yep, it’s awful. I just posted a comment that mentioned MATE. Great minds think alike. 😉

      If they dumped GNOME 3 and GNOME Classic, and just moved to MATE it would improve this distro a lot.

      1. Right on, Jim: “Great minds think alike!” … or is it “A mind is a terrible thing to be wasted” LOL

        I am really enjoying my antiX Core setup today. I put Chromium on it because right now the Nightly version of Firefox has a minor display issue; it causes a black bar to appear when scrolling pages in the new Yahoo Mail (which I don’t like; the previous Yahoo Mail was the best free Email client around; the current version tempts me to defect to GMail unless it improves soon)!

        Anyway, Chromium on antiX Core runs extremely smoothly, more so that Google Chrome, and it displays the intended text widgets in the mail client, which Seamonkey doesn’t do right now, (though in other respects, Seamonkey is my preferred network tool for browsing and Email. Chromium is a good alternative right now.

        AntiX is a GREAT alternative to Ubuntu of any flavor. I like it better than Lubuntu or Xubuntu because it lets me set things up the way I want them, without making the amount of work I have to do it get it the way I want it unreasonable; it’s a bit more work than Mint, and I have the responsibility to get things the way I want them, but it gives me all the tools I need, and the end result (with only modest effort) gives me a great deal of satisfaction with 100% of the results I want.

        A new antiX installation takes typically 10-15 minutes; a Core installation might take 5 minutes to get the Core system, 1/2 hour to an hour to install the remaining components. (Base is ready to go in 15 minutes). After that, it does take time to customize to suit, but in the meantime I have a 100% working system as I fine tune it the way I like it.

        I get this effect with antiX and I can do it with a Debian Live CD as well. Mint, Ubuntu *buntu give an immediate experience. For the average person, one of these is probably “Better” than antiX because they are simple, work right out of the box, and don’t require a deep initial understanding. For me, they are less satisfying because it’s not really what I want, and that is why I tend toward Debian, MEPIS, and antiX; they are closer to what I want, and stay out of my way when I choose to “mess with them”.

          1. Definitely. Now when you look at it, on the surface, it’s not for the super casual beginner. Someone who wants “things the way they’ve always been” is likely to not be interested in antiX, but the person who says: “Nothing I’ve used works the way I want it to work; I want to do it MY way” may really enjoy antiX.

            The guy, whose real name is Paul, who is English, but teaches in Thessalonica, is politically really against capitalism – calls himself anticapitalista, but that doesn’t prevent him from being a good guy. He shares his political views, but doesn’t demand others to follow them (or even discuss them).

            I recently read an article where Clem from Mint was interviewed. Recall that in his early days he made some political statements. They were the most misunderstood of the things he ever said or has done, and he now regrets them more than anything else that ever happened on the project.

            Fortunately, anti has managed to avoid those kinds of things because while he has political views, he confines them and doesn’t do a lot of bashing of those who use his distro who do not share his political views, so that works for me.

            We’ve collaborated many times; probably somewhere between five and ten suggestions I’ve made have gone directly into the products. I’ve also helped with smxi, and in the antiX version of it, my name is even cited, so that is gratifying and appreciated.

            So yeah, do try it out; I think you will find it refreshingly different. The base installation has a MEPIS look and feel, but once the installer actually gets going, it’s all antiX, now very different from its original MEPIS roots.

Leave a Reply