← Back to team overview

unity-design team mailing list archive

Re: What can we learn from Elementary OS?


I like how modular pantheon is compared to gnome/unity. Its all very slick
and well integrated, but at the same time pantheon lets me easily change
the default file manager for example, something that is a PIA to do in

I also the way its all designed, for speed and simplicity under the hood.
pantheon uses significantly less resources than gnome/unity while being
just as pretty.

While I really like gala and I am one of the people that wished they had
stuck with mutter when they first made the compiz switch, I don't think it
would be really worth it to change, especially after all the work canonical
has done on compiz. Also the way unity is implemented as a compiz plugin
means changing would be huge task. Compiz has gotten a lot better lately,
they should just keep improving it instead of making a massive switch for
relatively little gain.

Noise has a nice interface, but is not in good shape right now IMO, and
lacks features too. I've tested luna beta 1 on two machines so far, and on
both of them noise has a HUGE problem where it takes forever to import my
library, I'm talking 6 hours +, its definitely not nearly ready for
prime-time yet. I do support replacing rhythmbox with.. well pretty much
anything though, its a pretty lackluster media player, I preferred banshee.
Also the music lens still doesn't even work right with rhythmbox, the album
art doesn't show in the lense for songs that haven't been played yet /rant.

On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 10:10 PM, Britt Yazel <bwyazel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> As many of you have heard, Elementary OS has had it's beta 1 release, and
> after spending using and learning their operating system, I have come to
> appreciate it greatly. The primary reason for my appreciation is their
> continuity in their user interface, they tasteful animations, and their
> stability.
> The one thing that Elementary has done extremely well is the creation of
> their own DE called Pantheon. They have created more than just a shell for
> Gnome3 (not to belittle what Unity has done), but they have also rebuilt
> most of their underlying technologies as well to fit exactly their purpose,
> rather than relying on Gnome. Gala is one such example, to remove their
> dependence on Compiz. They have also made many of their own default
> applications to fit THEIR purpose, rather than trying to make their purpose
> fit a wide assortment of apps. (Midori, Maya, Noise, Scratch, etc)
> Now, I dont mean to belittle Gnome or Ubuntu. I use Ubuntu on a daily
> basis and love it greatly, and I also help with the Ubuntu Gnome Remix. I
> just think that ridding ourselves of Compiz dependence, and making Unity
> more than just the Visual shell, and rather creating more of the back-end
> utilities in house (like Gala and Mutter) will lead to a desktop that is
> more cohesive, rather than feeling "patchy".
> If this isn't possible, then perhaps we should be working with the
> Elementary team on their default app set and their underlying technologies,
> (could Unity make use of Gala instead of compiz?) Is Noise closer to
> Ubuntu's main goals for a music app than Rhythmbox?
> Let me know what you guys think. Cheers!
>  -Britt Yazel
> --
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~unity-design
> Post to     : unity-design@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~unity-design
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

Follow ups