Anyone pumped for Ubuntu 17.10 using the Gnome Shell? Looks really clean, seems legit to me.

DID THEY SWITCH THEIR DEFAULT BROWSER TO CHROME?!?

@DoubleAngels It's been Firefox for ages!

Yes, I may switch over from Mint

I don't like gnome. It's okay ui wise but it has a lot of problems like causing screen tearing 😤

@DoubleAngels it was, then unity, then back to gnome

Has there been any mentions as to what gnome --version it will ship with?

@Dacexi I think the Canonical guys and gals have been working hard to fix all those kinds of issues Gnome.

@RichSouth well, it's been there since I first started using Linux (2011)

@linuxxx They said they will let you choose on installation. I like it, choose is always good. And it makes life a tad bit easier for web Devs since we use chrome anyway

Btw yea. I'm super pumped for gnome being back on Ubuntu. Unity was shite and all it did was fracture an already small community between gnome and unity. Glad that's over 😊

How much RAM does it ate? I want to install 17.10 on a netbook. I have lubuntu with numix and stuff but this gnome looks good

Im using gnome already on 16

Still looks like unity ...
But much cleaner.
Will take a look, I guess

@Froot Totally agree. Unity had many issues. Let's hope it all stays in the past now!

@theuser 3.26

Just changed mine to Kubuntu 17.10 Yesterday

Well they definitely need a new icon theme, that's for sure

@Froot I doubt that they will give you a choice - Unity is being discontinued.

I can't say that I mind, too be honest. While I don't use Ubuntu for my private devices, my university has it on all computers and using Unity was always a pain (you could swap though - but others were insisting on unity sometimes, when doing pair programming or such).

@theCalcaholic Ah no I meant the browser. The product lead mentioned something about looking into giving users a choose during install about the software that will be included

@Froot Oh, I see! That's neat.

@linuxxx Just checked it. Firefox is still (thankfully) installed by default.

@gofrendi Currently not. But most Gnome3-Apps don't have the traditional menubar anyways.

I'm planning on updating, but I'm not using gnome. Or Unity. Or KDE, or Cinnamon. I'll use a lightweight WM, and use Ubuntu for what I like most about it: abundant packages.

@bahua Personally I have the feeling that you get more for ArchLinux/Manjaro.
If you use the AUR you do not eben have to install PPAs.
Some packages are even the ones for Debian/Ubuntu like spotify.

@UnsignedFoo Glad you had the sense to use lubuntu 👍 ubuntu is kinda notorious for eating up slightly more ram than other distros, but with lxde you should be ok

I'm already on gnome-shell with 17.04

@Froot Yeah but there's a big difference between shipping an open and non tracking browser by default or giving the end use the choice of a by default tracking one and since many people see the chrome icon as Internet icon, i think many people will choose it because they're familiar with it.

This is bad in my own opinion.

@linuxxx So you think they should limit our options because YOU don't like chrome. Hmmm... no... I don't agree

Chrome should be something users have to seek out, and the default should be something free (as in speech). Why should proprietary chrome be available and default on a system that stresses freedom? Especially when not even windows and macos force chrome at you.

The default is still Firefox, but as always the option is respected to each and every person.

@Froot Exactly what @bahua said, I think I said it the wrong way kinda

@linuxxx Well no. How is giving users the choice to install chrome instead of Firefox during OS install forcing it onto you? It's a choice. Don't like it? Don't use it. Simple

What you're advocating here is to remove that choice and force Firefox on people. I fail to see how forcing something onto people can ever be better than giving them a choice

I think the underlying issue here is that many people would choose chrome and you don't like it 😄

@Froot Of course I don't like it if people choose a browser that's integrated in a mass surveillance program!

But nope, I stand with @bahua's comment :)

@Froot Hell if you'd give Chromium as an option, fair enough! It doesn't contain proprietary Google bullshit so that's quite alright with me and the features/performance are nearly literally the same.

@linuxxx Cool. So you stand with removing choice and ramming what YOU think is best down people's throat. How is that different from communism?

Anyway, thankfully you're not on canonical board so there's no point arguing about it here. It's coming ☺️

@Froot Wow what the fuck. In case I wasn't clear, I think that a free (as in freedom) operating system only should include free software by default (That's the case right now though, right?).

That's all :).

Actually let me rephrase partly. Sure, give a list of browsers you can install. But, with every browser, at least write down what the privacy consequences can be!
So that people can make a properly thought-through choice :).

Now how's that for ramming my preferences into people's throats?

@linuxxx I got the feeling that you were against Ubuntu giving people a choice of browsers during install and preferred them forcing Firefox onto everyine like they do now. Was I wrong?

If there's a choice, sure, write it out. People should be informed. But why just privacy stuff? Because you feel it's the be all and end all of browser selection? No, if they decided to add some extra info there i think they should also add other important stuff like performance comparisons or ES spec compliance.

@Froot Oh the privacy was just am example. Mainly because irl I'm dealing with something that has to do with privacy and which is the reason why I refuse to chat unencrypted.

Anyhow, although I honestly think it's a bad idea for anyone to use proprietary browsers from the big data hogging companies, if you'd make a list anyways, make it the way I'm doing the comparisons on the privacy site. Just not only about privacy! What would be bad about that?

@linuxxx As long as there's a choice its all good.
With these lists tho, thing is, no-one is going to read them. And keep in mind, it's during the install. Most people will go, see chrome, choose it because they would have otherwise downloaded it anyway, and be done with it.

My Ubuntu had Firefox on it by default. Guess how many times I've used it. Once, to download chrome. So for me, Firefox was useless bulk in my system and having a choice during install would have been better. But then again I'm not your average web user so I make for a bad example 😄

@Froot Tbh I can't even download Chrome because I block everything Google network wide xD.

I use Chromium sometimes though but it takes about 1gb ram for only 5 tabs while Firefox can do 60+ tabs while staying under 500mb so yah :P.

@Froot As for the no one is going to read them part, no one for sure will read them if they don't exist!

@linuxxx Yea that's all fine and good but you're a sys admin. I'm a web dev, no sane person does web development on Firefox. Chrome's Dev tools are head and shoulders above anything else, it's not even a competition.

Also, chrome has some nice backup features built in for bookmarks and passwords and whatnot when you sign in. Others may also have that but I find it quite useful on chrome

Edit: The info text. Absolutely. I have no problem with them being there. They just have to be nicely integrated with the UI. Perhaps a "read more" button to expand them or something

@Froot Ahum. Professionally I'm a sysadmin but in my free time I'm a backend and very often also frontend dev. And yes, I like Firefox more for development.

And yeah Firefox has that build in as well although I only use it for the addon sync :)

@linuxxx Well good luck with your Firefox Dev tools then 🤣

Glad Firefox has it. How does it work tho? Does it keep the data in Mozilla's servers? Do you need a Mozilla account?

@Froot Yup a Firefox account is needed.

It's kept on the mozilla servers but encrypted with your password I thought or something like that :)

Firefox has outstanding web dev tools, and displays json FAR better than chrome. Firefox actually parses it and gives you a structured display, while chrome just barfs up the raw text(which Firefox can show you too, if you really want it). As someone who deals with APIs on a regular basis, this point alone pretty much relegates chrome to backup status for me.

Also, chrome doesn't let you intelligently select columns and rows from a table.

People tend to prefer chrome, but I find it to be almost entirely inferior to Firefox.

@bahua Firefox 57 changes EVERYTHING! <3