Not a week has passed and we already have the Cinnamon version 1.3.1 which fixes a lot of bugs for the benefit of its users 😀
Let's see some of the most relevant changes in this version:
- Easiest way to grab and drag applets:
- Panel zones now cover the entire panel. In Cinnamon 1.3 the applets only used the space they needed, leaving empty areas in the panel that did not react to drag and drop.
- The areas where the applets will be dragged are now highlighted.
- Now we have the option to restore the applets to their default settings.
- Text scale factor now uses a wheel button instead of a scale control.
- Slightly improved design.
- Smoother notifications.
- Fixed Battery Applet.
- Unnecessary warnings have been removed from the logs.
- The Typos applet was fixed in the systray.
- Fixed a bug that displayed larger icons in the systray.
There have also been some adjustments that affect themes. The panel for example now has 3 areas (left, center, right) in which some issues may be affected for Cinnamon. We can modify this by means of a pseudo-class called "dnd" inside the CSS.
background-gradient-direction: vertical;
background-gradient-start: rgba (255,0,0,0.05);
background-gradient-end: rgba (255,0,0,0.2);
}
#panelCenter: dnd {
background-gradient-direction: vertical;
background-gradient-start: rgba (0,255,0,0.05);
background-gradient-end: rgba (0,255,0,0.2);
}
#panelRight: dnd {
background-gradient-direction: vertical;
background-gradient-start: rgba (0,0,255,0.05);
background-gradient-end: rgba (0,0,255,0.2);
}
And already lña 3.1.2, at least in F-16.
regards
good that the linux mint guys have been able to correct those bugs ... but gnome shell behaves too well 🙂
Pffff, GREAT.
I was scared when I moved the icons and could not change it to its default place.
It is that we have to understand, that we must give them time. It's amazing how a small group of people have created such a great Shell and update it faster, than certain developers who are getting paid, a certain company whose name begins with "C".
Is the cool Shell the one that looks like Windows 95? Is the small group the one that modifies Banshee's code to keep the dough?
Unity in 12.04 is going great, it is going very fine and has evolved a lot since 11.04. Wasn't this Cinnamon correcting a shit they did?
Unity makes sense: in the technological evolution it is on the way to TV, Smartphones and Tablets. Can you imagine Windows 95, sorry Cinnamon, on a Smartphone ... very ugly.
I don't see any resemblance to Windows 95, in fact creating a theme for Cinnamon is extremely easy. Yes, that small group that gives 50% of the supposed profits they make from Banshee to their developers. And it is very, very absurd to compare Unity with Cinnamon in this case, since naturally, the objective of Linux Mint for now is not to reach the TV, Smartphone, or Tablet.
About Unity What can I tell you? Tried the Alpha and it doesn't go as fine as you say. Maybe if you have a good PC, everything is fine, but with 1GB of RAM, and the hardware that I currently have, Cinnamon and Gnome-Shell, runs much better.
Because they forced them, because those shameless Mint wanted to steal 100% of the profits ¬_¬
I go with the Alpha 2, in a lap with 1GB of RAM and an Intel Atom processor, and it works very well. Obviously Cinnamon is lighter. But I will not miss the opportunity to try Lens, HUD, Dash and all those kinds of things that seem novel (not new), and innovative to me.
I used Cinnamon in January, it was weird not hearing something: "The virus database has been updated" XD
Well, maybe that's the difference between you and me: You use an Intel Atom processor, technology that Ubuntu is dedicating a lot of effort to. I already told you, I tried the Alpha 2 and it was not that it was bad, simply that on the PC that I can use it at the moment, the use of the LENS was too slow for me.
THAT'S SAME I SAID !!!
That is, if they had waited only 3 days to release 1.3, it would not be necessary to release this other version to correct the lots of bugs that they left ¬_¬
If that had been said by another person, they would not listen to him. But you? Your comment cannot be more silly. You say it as if KDE released a version and had nothing to fix later. All software always has improvements that must be implemented. It is logical, they released a version and previous fixes afterwards. They all do that: Firefox, KDE, Gnome .. all ..
I understand what you are saying, but think about it a bit and you will see ... how long did it take / did it take to get this new version of bug fixes out? … how many days?
A very different thing is to release a version, and after 2 weeks to release a bug fix, and a very different thing is to release a version, and after 2 days to release a new one, correcting "a lot of bugs" (as you said). Come on, if they had waited those 2/3 days, they would not have had to get the .1 correcting the errors 😐
TDE:
There are those who hang themselves from the lianas, but in your case you not only hang yourself ... you also "Tarzaneas"
I'm going to ask you a series of questions and I hope you answer them with the proper arguments:
1.-The fact that the people of Linux Mint beech «Modified the code Banshee to keep the pasta » disqualifies them from creating a fork of GNOME?
2.-What does an ethical / moral question have to do with the technical?
The fact that Unity go great on Ubuntu 12.04 It is the least we can expect after more than a year of development and a large investment of resources, don't you think?
You claim that Unity it makes sense and future because now it is usable on mobiles and TVs… man, I have news for you: from the beginning it was designed for that, have you served as a tester and hadn't you noticed?
And if not, just tell me, apart from Ubuntu so that other distros GNU / Linux It has developed Unity?
Si Unity basically it is used only by Ubuntu Where then is its future as a shell for desktop PCs?
Cinnamon it is just in its third month of development (it was launched on December 22) and against (and despite) what you think and / or stop thinking, it is aimed at a totally different group of users not only in the way of perceiving what It should be GUI but even how they use it. And that if you do not want to understand it, you must at least respect it TDE.
What Cinnamon still has defects and what Clement rushed to release version 1.3? It is true. But these have already been corrected.
I answer it with pleasure.
1. It does not disqualify you. You mistakenly put together two questions, sarcastic, that were intended to show two different things: that Cinnamon as a GUI does not represent anything new, quite the opposite; and? desde Linux Mint are not saints (regarding the comment I am responding to.
2. What does the technical have to do with ethics? EVERYTHING, absolutely EVERYTHING. If you separate technological development from ethics, you can justify Hitler's experiments with the Jews. All human development must be linked to the ethical question. Do you understand that human developments should be aimed at representing an improvement that does not affect the human? Translated this, it is like this: This is Linux, this is GNU, it is an OS with ethics, this is not Microsoft or Apple.
Your reasoning, as Unity is only for Ubuntu and therefore does not represent much development, is partly correct and partly it is not. It is correct considering the rules of the game (apparently respected) that exist in the Linux environment. It is not adequate, as progress has been directed towards a new way of thinking about the desktop. And at that point, Unity offers a lot more than Cinnamon.
When you tell me «Cinnamon is just in its third month of development (it was released on December 22) and against (and despite) what you think and / or stop thinking it is directed towards a totally different group of users not only in the way of perceiving what GUI should be but even how they use it. And that if you don't want to understand it, you must at least respect it. TDE »I agree. But what happens when Canonical is attacked by different environments for its pretensions? Just look at the comment I reply to. Don't those who support the Linux Mint project fall for the same thing?
Tina Toledo, as for "tarzaneo" ... if you give me the option I could even juggle like a monkey. Did you have to attack ad hominem? I at least attack, from my feeling and my way of perceiving what a desktop environment represents to a concept and a dubious procedure (Cinnamon and Linux Mint). However, if I were faced with Clement, or "Uncle" Mark, don't expect me to fall into the baseness of addressing an ad Hominem argument first. That is ethical, right?
I attest to error in this question: «Do you understand that human developments should be aimed at representing an improvement that does not affect the human? »If I am allowed to rethink it, I would express it like this:« Do you understand that human developments should be aimed at representing an improvement, a well-being, that does not affect the free development of the human?
As for the technical and the moral / ethical question, I must say: the technical must not be understood from itself, it must also be approached from the environment it affects. Or is it that the Frankfurt School, ethical phenomenology or Habermas, questioned themselves about the behavior of this technical-scientific era only to say naivety about the levels of involvement of the paradigms of the great industrial classes?
As you said, "I hope you answer them with the proper arguments."
TDE said:
«As you said," I hope you answer them with the proper arguments "."
1. It does not disqualify you. You mistakenly put together two questions, sarcastic, that were intended to show two different things: that Cinnamon as a GUI does not represent anything new, quite the opposite; and? desde Linux Mint are not saints (regarding the comment I am responding to.
2. What does the technical have to do with ethics? EVERYTHING, absolutely EVERYTHING. If you separate technological development from ethics, you can justify Hitler's experiments with the Jews. All human development must be linked to the ethical question. Do you understand that human developments should be aimed at representing an improvement that does not affect the human? Translated this, it is like this: This is Linux, this is GNU, it is an OS with ethics, this is not Microsoft or Apple.
It does not represent reality, firstly because both premises start from your perception and not from a universal truth (the intention or not of Clement to appropriate these resources) and then we would have to start from the a priori conception that those of Canonical They are saints and who act under rigid ethical and moral codes and, therefore, Unity lacks macula. Do not Canonical "Business" with the people of Banshee to keep 75% of that income?
If I rely on your Hiitlerian example, no grayscale, so obnoxious is then what they did Linux Mint such as Canonical.
Is that for me an impediment for them to develop Unity? Well, no…
According to your logic, then you would have to criticize everything and everyone and if you were really consistent with all that you wrote, you would NEVER use, no longer a GNU / Linux operating system, but even a PC (you know the working conditions of the workers who assembled the parts that make up the PC you use).
When we understand that within the GNU / Linux world there are companies and vested interests that go beyond ethical and moral issues, then we will put aside that mask of hypocrisy, or naivety in the best of cases, and we will understand that any humanistic, social philosophy or economic is a good tool to diagnose and understand a fact ... but it does not fix human behavior. And in that not everything is white, white, or black, black.
You claim that Cinnamon has no future because the conception of the desks of the future are style Unity and I cannot refute that argument for one reason only: for some strange reason, unlike you, I can only perceive the present. Today, for today, not even the people of Canonical can affirm that Unity will be the future GUI on desktop PCs based on hard data ... nor can it be said that Cinnamon it will be. But I assure you that if an OBJECTIVE survey is carried out today there are more favorable opinions about Cinnamon what about Unity. Which would not be an indicator of which is better either, but would only reflect a trend.
On the other hand, do not try to give me lessons about what an ad hominem attack is and about ethics when you wrote yourself «the small group is that who modifies Banshee's code to keep the dough? "
At least I told you face to face, to your face and with the opportunity to defend yourself. It would be cowardly and low for me to write what I wrote somewhere else and behind your back and to judge you in absentia.
Do not say that it gives you courage to criticize yourself without reason Unity because I can refer your comments 12, 22 and 26, from another place, where you, for no reason, express yourself in exactly the same terms as your answer to elav so the least I can think of is that your reaction is not a product of what elav commented but, that you simply like to disqualify the work of Cinnamon. Come on, your annoyance is not that you criticize Unity but the very existence of Cinnamon
Exact Tina. Since I saw the comment of TDE I seemed to be seeing those users pro Ubuntu who got upset (and a lot) when for example Linux Mint unseated this distro in Distrowatch. Only a blind person cannot see that they are two products with different objectives and that was more than clear from the beginning. It is more, not only Unity It is designed to go beyond the PC, if we look at its structure and design, gnome-shell as well. It remains to be seen if time proves me right.
pd My opinion on the Linux Mint / Banshee issue was expressed in this topic: https://blog.desdelinux.net/linux-mint-se-queda-con-las-ganancias-de-banshee-clem-responde/
That's what I thought at the time and that's what I still think now.
I answer again, and I ask you to excuse me, because in the previous comment I had many syntactic errors. I also add some little things
Tub:
It is funny your tendency (already mentioned in my first answer) to unite certain things that are not linked, and from there to deduce certain kinds of things that in one way or another I have not said.
I just want to comment on a few things here. I don't know why you put quotes around the fact that Canonical negotiated with Banshee. If he did, I don't know if you can tell, but it's not the same as desde Linux Mint have manipulated the code. Do you understand that it is the same? You who are determined to show that desde Linux (with good reason) there is an economic trend involved, do you understand that negotiating is the same as manipulating code without warning? Were Clement's answers the most serious? Did he not apologize for something? Then you are not at all clear about the necessary relationship between ethics and technological development (closely linked to that “human behavior” you call). You clearly demonstrate this in your opinion expressed in the link, with all that string of comments where you try to defend the indefensible, using makeup with retouched postures, accentuating adjectives, attacking people, etc.
I give you every reason in the fact of erecting me as a critic of everything if it were consistent. For something I use Linux as an OS and not others. If you could do something to stop in some way the working conditions of exploited people, would you do it? The world needs technology, but linked to good human development. If there was a way to stop, for example, what Foxconn does, right would it be worth it? There are people who fight, there are people who want a different world. Is that wrong? I do not know what you mean by ethics, I insist, by attacking ad Hominem and not knowing how to conceive of such a necessary relationship between ethics and technical-scientific development.
I affirm that Cinnamon has no future. You affirm that you can only see the present. Do you believe what you say is true? Tell me something, do you save? How do you do to market? How do you project yourself? Human beings do not live exclusively in the present. We do not have a mental structure like that of an octopus or a chicken. Do you see that your argument is fallacious? Where is it left to know that we move in temporal dimensions, and that in this way we have established cultures and histories. I only affirm that Cinammon has no future because of the current (PRESENT) technological trends in vogue.
If you talk about objectivity for a survey, we'll see what they think. You will surely be surprised seeing the result. I am open to it. I can't argue if the 15 million Ubuntu users lose to the 500 that Linux Mint may have, and I'm not very happy if Unity is chosen either.
On the other hand, don't you think it's superb and unethical (I insist) to try NOT to receive 'lessons'? Even the wisest are good students despite being wise. It is not bad at all, from anyone in the world, to learn something. If you look closely, I just continued with Elav's statement about the "small group", which by the way, is not a lie. Who do the Linux Mint repositories depend on? Does Linux Mint collaborate with Ubuntu and Debian (package updates, security patch corrections) and therefore the community, as they do from Canonical with Debian?
And finally, I agree with what you say: Cinammon bothers me. Is there a problem? After you do not attack other PEOPLE (of which you can speak for example by saying that 'tarzaneo') I do not see a problem. If you are a defender of Mint and Clement, I don't care, I don't care, if I see a comment where you criticize Unity, I will criticize it and blame you that Cinammon also has many defects. Likewise, if I ever had the opportunity to share some personal contact with you, to talk (anything that implies a horizontal relationship between humans) believe me that with the greatest of respect and in the most restrained way I would address you.
I do not know if this thread can continue to be given in a post that is already lagging a bit behind.
TDE
You roll so much into your own roll that you end up writing an original and a corrected and enlarged second edition. That's making the partridge dizzy.
First of all I want to tell you that your ideologies and personal positions regarding how you think technology should develop I respect them ... but honestly I don't care about them and I'm not interested in knowing them. What's more, if you are the living reincarnation of the Mother Teresa of Calcutta I do not care.
Secondly; one of the points to discuss and that, it seems to me, is the real reason for all your roll -and roll- is the fact that he told you to "be late." For a person who presumes to understand philosophical questions, you seem to be very clumsy to understand a metaphor, so is it okay for you to translate it so that you understand it? Well ... here you go with apples ... pay attention: «TDE, you are an exaggeration to affirm that… «
But, in addition, you seem to have very delicate skin, since you have no qualms about calling some thieves, ah ... but you get irritated when they call you exaggerated! And it is in this sense that I do not accept your lessons on ethics and morals. How does a guy who calls some thieves come to claim that I attack him personally because I tell him that he is exaggerating with what he claims? Didn't I exercise the same freedom of expression as you? Or do you have the right to call some thieves but I have no right to tell you that you are exaggerating?
If you think it's great Unity Well that's good!… And you also have all the freedom to proclaim for any blog that exists (as I already showed you that you do) that Cinnamon it's horrible and looks like Windows 95, but do not pretend that what YOU believe we all share, much less that your statement is a universal truth.
Third: I am not a defender of anyone, much less of Clement.. what did not seem to me, and still does not seem to me, is the public lynching that was carried out. Mostly basically started by the people of CanonicalBecause to have a long tongue, you have to have a short tail. And those of Canonical both are very long. What you call negotiation between Canonical y Banshee it was nothing more than an imposition by the South Africans who acted from their position of power (http://www.zdnet.com/blog/open-source/banshee-vs-ubuntu-linux-on-revenue-sharing/8296).
Fourth: The fact that it bothers the existence of Cinnamon It does not represent a major problem, but do not come to act like a troll with provocative comments that do not add anything to the topic, or did you expect that here, unlike the other blog, users would applaud and give a lot of thumbs up to an opinion that, more than a contribution , is it impertinence?
Nobody restricts your freedom of expression in this place, and nobody will, but if you think that the "opinions" that you are pouring here and in another blog are so relevant, why don't you write them in the same blog of Cinnamon? That would be ethical and moral ... but above all it would show that you have the courage to show your face and say things up front.
On the other hand, I no longer plan to continue feeding the troll.
Ubuntoso in sight
Well, it's been a long time since you commented, but I'll gladly answer you if you don't read it, as other users will read it.
Cinnamon has come a long way, more than unity would do in 4 years, cinnamon is super light, it is not a source of resources like unity and it is worth it, you say it stops at windows 95 ?, wao how can you compare it with the win interface 95. I that you retracted xd, but cinnamon has evolved to venecer steps much more than unity.
Getting to all devices with the same product, Unity, is something commendable…. but I doubt very much that they make a gap between Android and others. Canonical should focus on achieving a perfect operating system or at least Mac OS or Windows level… before farting bigger than the ass. I hope they achieve it, but for me it is not the best way: Ubuntu has improved a lot (linux in general) but many things continue to fail and now all interest is in this objective ... it seems that they have already solved the stability problems, compatibility, etc.
Regarding Cinnamon…. what progress has to be made, but it is an outdated concept and a waste of time and effort. Because there are already other desktops under the same concept of menus, etc. and because the future tends to be tactile ... and even the best-designed system (Apple) understands it and gradually merges elements of iOS.
Which company? Coñónical?
What theme are you using?
In Cinnamon I'm using the default one: Adwaita 😀
It has not yet been updated in LMDE and it is that my repositories point to LMDE. I'll wait for them to come by default. I'm not in a hurry and I'm very patient. After all, it is a Rolling Release and the time will come when it will have to be updated.
Well, it has been mounted well.
Who could say that he is in possession of the absolute truth?
Is it true that someone can boast of being in possession of the absolute truth?
And if this were to be the case, what use could it be to others? Absolute or relative truth and for what?
Hi folks, I have a problem with cinnamon and updated to version 1.3.1 from 1.2. and now I only see the black panel without applets or anything only the black panel.
And I uninstalled it with sudo apt-get purge cinnamon, I do a sudo apt-get autoclean and I bleach it to clean it, I reinstalled it but the black panel still appears and I can't do anything.
Does anyone know how I should uninstall it completely with all its dependencies and thus be able to have it correctly again. To say that if I create a new user or enter as a guest it works perfectly, the case is that with the normal user that I use I get all the black panel.
Say I use Oneiric 11.10 with gnome-shell. But the truth cinnamon loved me.
Greetings and thank you very much.
Test:
rm -R ~/.local/share/cinnamonAnd go back in to see
Nothing mate keeps doing the same, everything goes well but the panel only comes out in black, it does nothing, nor does it let me add or remove anything. I do not know what it could be.
Greetings and thanks for answering.
Well try something else. Save the .config, .cache, .gnome2, .gconf, .gconfd folders and delete them. Log out and log back in.
It works perfectly if I delete all those folders, that is if everything remains unconfigured, no funds, no docky, or nothing wallpaper as if it were virgin, but it works.
But of course if I put the folders back in and replace everything and restart again, the desktop appears all right but with the cinnamon bar again black with nothing. His would be to know which file is the one I have to delete and in which folder it is. Which I don't know. Perhaps you who know more could tell me the steps to do to find the file that gives me the error so that the bar does not appear correctly.
Let's see if you can tell me something.
Greetings and thank you very much.
Hello:
Inside home / .gconf / desktop there is a folder called cinnamon
1.-Back it up
2.-Then remove the file% gconf.xml that is inside that folder -next to the windows folder-
3.-Open the windows folder and delete the file also called% gconf.xml.
4.-Restart your session.
If everything went well you will have a Cinnamon virgin to set up again.
Exactly, although I think it would be enough to run in a terminal
cinnamon-settingsGo to the tab applets and hit the button Restore to default
LOL! That is the first thing to do ...
… Haven't you? :OR
Is the age
MATE works better than Cinnamon on my pc with 1gb, lighter. 🙂
It is lighter because MATE is GNOME 2 and Cinnamon is GNOME 3.