Elementary OS Loki 0.4 Stable Release(blog.elementary.io)
blog.elementary.io
Elementary OS Loki 0.4 Stable Release
http://blog.elementary.io/post/147637979911/loki-04-stable-release
20 comments
Oh please, just because you don't like something does not mean people in the Linux space before elementary were just slapping stuff together.
Sure, there are a lot of distributions and desktop environments that focus on getting stuff done and let the user customize the look to their needs, but that is hardly the only choice.
For anyone wanting to try out a cohesive setup try one of the following:
- GNOME on Fedora (or Korora if you want binary repos).
- Unity on Ubuntu
- KDE on OpenSUSE
Sure, there are a lot of distributions and desktop environments that focus on getting stuff done and let the user customize the look to their needs, but that is hardly the only choice.
For anyone wanting to try out a cohesive setup try one of the following:
- GNOME on Fedora (or Korora if you want binary repos).
- Unity on Ubuntu
- KDE on OpenSUSE
Sorry. I've used Gnome, Unity, and KDE extensively. There is an incredible amount of work that goes into them sure but they are definitely not polished.
I'm the definition of UnixPorn junkie and customize my linux box to the hilt but even I have to admit when there is a benefit of standardization and the work the elementary people are doing.
I'm the definition of UnixPorn junkie and customize my linux box to the hilt but even I have to admit when there is a benefit of standardization and the work the elementary people are doing.
I did not say gnome and KDE. I specifically mentioned gnome on Fedora and KDE on opensuse.
I'm not sure what you mean by polish. Is it perfect? No. Is it better than say OS X and stays much more out of your way? For me GNOME 3 does a much better job than OS X.
So, do you have examples of that or anything?
Because otherwise I can just proclaim that GNOME, Unity and KDE are polished and then we're at opinion vs. opinion.
I mean, I don't even really think that Unity is terribly polished, but someone else might (e.g. the commenter you replied to), and then your opinion is not any better than their opinion.
Because otherwise I can just proclaim that GNOME, Unity and KDE are polished and then we're at opinion vs. opinion.
I mean, I don't even really think that Unity is terribly polished, but someone else might (e.g. the commenter you replied to), and then your opinion is not any better than their opinion.
I guess he was talking about usability, not the tech behind it.
Gnome/kde/unity all looks and feels good in one area and bad in another. People disagree about what's right with them on a very fundamental level. Juggling between the user experience and maintain the tech behind is has clearly taken a large toll on these desktop environments.
On the other hand (I guess from an average user's perspective) Elementary feels very cohesive. It feels like the one destro has a much nicer balance between the tech and usability.
But it also has its caveats. If I recall correctly, you can't minimize apps on Elementary, you can only close them...
Gnome/kde/unity all looks and feels good in one area and bad in another. People disagree about what's right with them on a very fundamental level. Juggling between the user experience and maintain the tech behind is has clearly taken a large toll on these desktop environments.
On the other hand (I guess from an average user's perspective) Elementary feels very cohesive. It feels like the one destro has a much nicer balance between the tech and usability.
But it also has its caveats. If I recall correctly, you can't minimize apps on Elementary, you can only close them...
I'm using this distro since Luna and you always could minimize apps...
There's no minimize button in app windows' title bars, but you can minimize an app by clicking its icon in the dock.
Of course, it proves the overall point, but turning on the minimize button is just a pref, exposed by GNOME-tweak-tool [1]
1: https://askubuntu.com/questions/125765/how-do-i-add-minimize...
1: https://askubuntu.com/questions/125765/how-do-i-add-minimize...
I had a #! setup for a couple years that I liked. OpenBox is clean.
I see that the project is continued as BunsenLabs Linux. I'll give that a try as I just wiped my laptop last week.
https://www.bunsenlabs.org/
http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=bunsenlabs
I see that the project is continued as BunsenLabs Linux. I'll give that a try as I just wiped my laptop last week.
https://www.bunsenlabs.org/
http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=bunsenlabs
crunchbang was a great distro and community
they loved their conky ;p
i use openbox and wonder why anyone else would use anything else when using a windowed wm
they loved their conky ;p
i use openbox and wonder why anyone else would use anything else when using a windowed wm
I'm using KDE on Ubuntu since 12.04 and IMHO it's just as good as OpenSUSE.
Oh and you forgot to mention Cinnamon on Mint. It's very polished too.
Oh and you forgot to mention Cinnamon on Mint. It's very polished too.
Ubuntu, (gnome edition) used to be almost perfect for me.
Same goes for Mandriva (KDE edition).
Same goes for Mandriva (KDE edition).
[deleted]
"Privacy & Security : We always strive to provide the utmost level of privacy and security to users of elementary OS, and Loki is no different. We’ve made improvements to Privacy Mode, which is like “Incognito” for the entire OS. For example, now when you’re using Privacy Mode, the Videos and Music apps won’t remember what you last played the next time you open them."
Ah, this looks interesting.
Ah, this looks interesting.
And they say Linux can't be pretty. If only this distribution had more support! The team hs already done wonders making it the most well-polished Linux distribution out there. Perfect for those transitioning from a Mac/Windows.
I'm a Windows/Linux user. I feel like something like Linux Mint is very much polished. My complain is the lack of main apps: adobe suite and visual studio in my case.
I agree that Mint is very much polished but I actually started recommending Elementary over it just because of well it looks, it's quite subjective.
Adobe suite and VS are also the sole reason I have a Windows dual boot set up. Hopefully in the future but I honestly doubt it.
Adobe suite and VS are also the sole reason I have a Windows dual boot set up. Hopefully in the future but I honestly doubt it.
Looks are pretty silly and irrelevant for most power users. I run Ubuntu with the i3 tiling window manager, which doesn't even have a desktop. Having a desktop is another thing that's pretty much irrelevant, given the way i3 works. I would never sacrifice the functionality I really like just to get something that's supposedly "prettier".
Looks are extremely important for everyone. i3, however, is an example of something that looks good. For bad, see https://www.gnome-look.org/p/1013849/, https://www.gnome-look.org/p/1013788/, https://www.gnome-look.org/p/1013780/.
There are different kinds of users. No need to call something silly and irrelevant just because it doesn't fit your preferences and priorities.
For example, one of the first things I check when trying out a new Linux distro is whether I can tweak the font rendering exactly the way I like. If this takes more than a few minutes, or if Firefox and LibreOffice don't pick up my tweaks consistently, that distro is out. I don't care what other awesome features it has. If I'm going to be looking at it for 10 hours a day, it had better not hurt my eyes. I would never sacrifice visual comfort just to get something that's supposedly "more functional". But that's just me. Other people will have other priorities.
For example, one of the first things I check when trying out a new Linux distro is whether I can tweak the font rendering exactly the way I like. If this takes more than a few minutes, or if Firefox and LibreOffice don't pick up my tweaks consistently, that distro is out. I don't care what other awesome features it has. If I'm going to be looking at it for 10 hours a day, it had better not hurt my eyes. I would never sacrifice visual comfort just to get something that's supposedly "more functional". But that's just me. Other people will have other priorities.
Usability is important. Basically every X.org distro ever supports your i3 power user setup. A much smaller number of distros are aimed exclusively at making Linux easier for average users.
I just don't understand that argument, on two fronts: First, Elementary looks almost exactly like a stock Fedora Gnome desktop (slightly clunkier, actually, in terms of window decorations and the settings panels)...so, how is it uniquely pretty in the Linux world? Second, I consider recent Gnome on Fedora to be comparable to Windows and mac OS (preferable, even, IMHO).
Linux from several vendors has been pretty for years. Being pretty, or historic lack thereof, clearly isn't the thing keeping Windows and mac OS users from switching in droves.
Linux from several vendors has been pretty for years. Being pretty, or historic lack thereof, clearly isn't the thing keeping Windows and mac OS users from switching in droves.
> First, Elementary looks almost exactly like a stock Fedora Gnome desktop (slightly clunkier, actually, in terms of window decorations and the settings panels)...so, how is it uniquely pretty in the Linux world?
Maybe this will save someone else some googling:
elementary OS 0.4 Beta Screenshots http://www.distroscreens.com/2016/06/elementary-os-04-loki-b...
Fedora 24 Screenshots http://www.distroscreens.com/2016/06/fedora-24-workstation-s...
Fedora 25 Alpha Screenshots http://www.distroscreens.com/2016/09/fedora-25-alpha-screens...
Maybe this will save someone else some googling:
elementary OS 0.4 Beta Screenshots http://www.distroscreens.com/2016/06/elementary-os-04-loki-b...
Fedora 24 Screenshots http://www.distroscreens.com/2016/06/fedora-24-workstation-s...
Fedora 25 Alpha Screenshots http://www.distroscreens.com/2016/09/fedora-25-alpha-screens...
I'm fascinated by Vala, can anyone talk about how it's used in elementary and if it's a huge productivity benefit? I really think Vala and its ecosystem should get more attention!
Vala seems interesting but at this point in time I wish that Vala, much like Gtk, wasn't ever necessary.
Both were created due to licensing concerns (Vala -> C#/Mono, Gtk -> Qt).
Both were created due to licensing concerns (Vala -> C#/Mono, Gtk -> Qt).
Vala wasn't created due to licensing concerns but rather because it could provide a high-level language for Gtk+ applications that was at the same time safer and as performant as C. This is because at that time writing Gtk+ applications in C required lots of boilerplate, was extremely error-prone, and had not attracted as many contributors to GNOME.
There were C# (Mono) bindings available for Gtk+ long before Vala was invented and even a few GNOME applications using them, but C# Gtk+ apps didn't take off. I doubt anybody that chose Vala would have preferred to write their programs in C#. Because even if licensing concerns were not an issue, the performance of Mono was not up to par. Also, installing a Mono app pulled in huge dependencies, which gave it a reputation for bloat.
There were C# (Mono) bindings available for Gtk+ long before Vala was invented and even a few GNOME applications using them, but C# Gtk+ apps didn't take off. I doubt anybody that chose Vala would have preferred to write their programs in C#. Because even if licensing concerns were not an issue, the performance of Mono was not up to par. Also, installing a Mono app pulled in huge dependencies, which gave it a reputation for bloat.
Comparing Vala to C# isn't fair. Vala is transpiled to C, then compiled to machine code, therefore has source compatibility with C and uses automatic reference counting, while C# is compiled to byte code, needs wrappers around C and uses garbage collection.
They both are high level languages, but definitly with different goals.
Why should this matter to someone interacting with Vala as a programmer the language?
These are implementation details of the runtime. Vala predates the new plans laid out over the last ~18 months, but at this point, shouldn't Vala be a research branch of C#? Seems like this kind of approach would serve as a multiplier for the benefits Vala is trying to bring to the world, from both sides.
These are implementation details of the runtime. Vala predates the new plans laid out over the last ~18 months, but at this point, shouldn't Vala be a research branch of C#? Seems like this kind of approach would serve as a multiplier for the benefits Vala is trying to bring to the world, from both sides.
"shouldn't Vala be a research branch of C#?"
Vala is a nicer shinier layer for programming with GObject in C. I don't really understand what it has to do with C#? Do you mean just the syntactic influence?
Keep in mind, lots of vocal people hated Mono, not just because of some vague looming threat of possible patent action, but because they disliked the memory heavy and slow startup nature of the runtime (see: Tomboy).
Vala is a nicer shinier layer for programming with GObject in C. I don't really understand what it has to do with C#? Do you mean just the syntactic influence?
Keep in mind, lots of vocal people hated Mono, not just because of some vague looming threat of possible patent action, but because they disliked the memory heavy and slow startup nature of the runtime (see: Tomboy).
1. Start with C#
2. Create research fork
3. Change it just enough until it can do what you're trying to get out of Vala right now (including whatever sweeping changes you want from the runtime by targeting GObject, so that it exhibits the static properties Vala wants here)
Result:
GNU/Gnome/Vala benefits from it, and the C#/.Net folks can benefit from it, if ever that research makes its way upstream. Which in turn brings another round of benefits to Vala's users and maintainers. My overall point is that symbiosis is nice. There's strength in numbers.
2. Create research fork
3. Change it just enough until it can do what you're trying to get out of Vala right now (including whatever sweeping changes you want from the runtime by targeting GObject, so that it exhibits the static properties Vala wants here)
Result:
GNU/Gnome/Vala benefits from it, and the C#/.Net folks can benefit from it, if ever that research makes its way upstream. Which in turn brings another round of benefits to Vala's users and maintainers. My overall point is that symbiosis is nice. There's strength in numbers.
> C# is compiled to byte code
Mono supports AOT compilation to native code, as well as .NET Core.
Languages and implementation aren't the same thing.
Mono supports AOT compilation to native code, as well as .NET Core.
Languages and implementation aren't the same thing.
A fantastic job, really well done.
It's great to see a distro with such a strong focus on design.
It's great to see a distro with such a strong focus on design.
I wish they could create a bigger team. Then eOS would be a real contender. Their ideas and their execution are great, but their output is far too low.
I personally would prefer arch as the basis - like Antergos and Manjaro. But this is a different thing.
I personally would prefer arch as the basis - like Antergos and Manjaro. But this is a different thing.
I think using arch as its basis would clash too much with their target audience. I have not tried Antergos or Manjaro, but at least arch itself is often rather high-maintenance due to its rolling release nature.
I think someone looking for an easy-to-use desktop would not be amused if her/his touchpad stops working one day or the system would not boot properly.
Using a LTS Ubuntu or Debian as a basis allows you to not worry so much about things breaking and focus your energy on the added value you provide.
I think someone looking for an easy-to-use desktop would not be amused if her/his touchpad stops working one day or the system would not boot properly.
Using a LTS Ubuntu or Debian as a basis allows you to not worry so much about things breaking and focus your energy on the added value you provide.
Yes, I know. That's why it is my personal preference.
With Manjaro it's working quite well, because their repos are 2 weeks behind of arch.
With Antergos it's a problem sometimes. My system was never unusable, but especially Gnome updates introduced some errors.
That said, using an arch based distro as dev machine, is insanely great. Installing the newest version of Android studio is like:
yaourt android-studio
With Manjaro it's working quite well, because their repos are 2 weeks behind of arch.
With Antergos it's a problem sometimes. My system was never unusable, but especially Gnome updates introduced some errors.
That said, using an arch based distro as dev machine, is insanely great. Installing the newest version of Android studio is like:
yaourt android-studio
Does Android Studio have an built in upgrade option?
They were quite quick at getting this release out. I had been using Luna in 2014 and remember waiting a long time for the release of Isis (which was renamed to Freya before it was released in 2015). I eventually gave up waiting and went back to Lubuntu (which was a better fit for my 10 year old laptop).
I like what they’re doing a lot and think they carved out a unique space in the world of GNU/Linux distributions. There’s a lot to be said for emphasising usability and aesthetics and not overwhelming the user with too much software choice or OS customisations. I’m not the target market because I spend a lot of my time in the terminal but I’d be happy to recommend Elementary to friends and family who don’t want to have to think too much about their computing environment.
I like what they’re doing a lot and think they carved out a unique space in the world of GNU/Linux distributions. There’s a lot to be said for emphasising usability and aesthetics and not overwhelming the user with too much software choice or OS customisations. I’m not the target market because I spend a lot of my time in the terminal but I’d be happy to recommend Elementary to friends and family who don’t want to have to think too much about their computing environment.
Lubuntu and xubuntu are also quite good if you have old laptop. They eat ram in mb not gb.
Didn't know that they had a development podcast. Ooo that intro is classy, much like Elementary.
This is great. I've been waiting for them to catch up with Ubuntu LTS so I can move over. I already know Geary is quirky and still doesn't handle contacts and that the calendar apparently doesn't sync with anything (at least one of the betas didn't), but the nice, clutter-free desktop (mostly) makes up for it.
Another year, another Geary release without even the slightest support for address books.
Until i hadn't purchased macbook, I always had my eyes gazed upon elementary OS. Everyone wants to have OSX look and feel but this linux distribution actually did it.
The last time I tried Elementary, I had significant problems getting Geary to play nicely with Gmail. Gmail didn't recognize Geary as being a "verified" mail client. I ended up using Thunderbird, but that seemed to defeat the purpose of having Elementary at all (at least for me). Does anyone know if this problem has been resolved? The Loki notes didn't seem to mention this.
I've been using it on Freya and it works very well with my Gmail account.
As much as I love the looks and the design theory of Elementary OS I hate the task switcher! In 0.3 my Alt+Shift+Tab didn't used to work, and well if I have 10 windows open and I missed the window while speed switching, good luck. I wish someone can implement a better switcher!
I would think of using this if they switch to rolling release system or had Ubuntu like release cadence
Rolling releases and ubuntu-like cadences are why Linux environments are pretty much always ugly and have usability problems. It takes time to work on UX, which is something a lot of projects don't do.
Rolling releases and usability seem completely unrelated. It takes time to work on UX, sure; how is a rolling release interfering with that? It should do the opposite, really, by not applying the same pressure by nature to have the design finalized and implemented in time for release X.Y.
Also, usability aside, I definitely wouldn't call either GNOME or Unity ugly, and they’re the popular ones.
Also, usability aside, I definitely wouldn't call either GNOME or Unity ugly, and they’re the popular ones.
Ever used Antergos or Manjaro?
Is Loki based on Ubuntu at all? I've just been very used to Ubuntu. The skin looks very pretty. I'm gonna try this out in a VM.
Yes, it is literally just Ubuntu underneath, but they don't mention that on the release notes—it bothers me that they're not more open about that.
Every two years, they take the latest long-term support (LTS) Ubuntu release and then install quite a number of their own applications to replace stock GNOME and Unity ones. To their credit, they have a good eye for UI/UX and actually write applications—not just themes—that are simple and look nice. They care about fonts, colors, etc, and even have some decent style and code guidelines for developers:
https://elementary.io/developer
Every two years, they take the latest long-term support (LTS) Ubuntu release and then install quite a number of their own applications to replace stock GNOME and Unity ones. To their credit, they have a good eye for UI/UX and actually write applications—not just themes—that are simple and look nice. They care about fonts, colors, etc, and even have some decent style and code guidelines for developers:
https://elementary.io/developer
They recently launched this page referencing all open source stuff that's included in Elementary OS: https://elementary.io/open-source
[deleted]
Still no hidpi support?
The core devs said Loki now supports HIDPI out of the box.
Here is the youtube video : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MN8dVJ6_AL8
Here is the youtube video : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MN8dVJ6_AL8
If anyone else needs this, found out you can enable it with the following:
gsettings set org.gnome.desktop.interface scaling-factor 2
gsettings set org.gnome.desktop.interface scaling-factor 2
Pretty much all bundled software works well with 2x scaling factor and looks great on rMBP.
It's not sufficient to just slap things together and hope they are somehow cohesive to compete in the desktop space today.
These people get it.