[HN Gopher] KDE vs. Gnome Design Philosophies (2017)
___________________________________________________________________
KDE vs. Gnome Design Philosophies (2017)
Author : jhvkjhk
Score : 30 points
Date : 2021-03-25 13:40 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.ocsmag.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.ocsmag.com)
| danans wrote:
| After years of trying to make either work like I want, I
| discovered tiling window managers like xmonad and i3 and I
| haven't looked back, as I've gained so much efficiency in my work
| tasks.
|
| I still use a traditional desktop environment for most browser
| and app tasks, but even there I end up tiling or maximizing the
| windows using keyboard shortcuts. Dragging overlapping windows
| sucks and I never want to do it again.
| bmn__ wrote:
| Don't look back, look forward. You don't need to abandon KDE
| over the perceived lack of a single feature. It's simply not
| enabled by default because tiling is esoteric.
|
| Run `systemsettings5 kcm_keys` - KWin and (re)assign keys to
| the window manager actions you need. If that's not sufficient,
| then run `systemsettings5 kwinscripts` - Get New Scripts... -
| filter "tiling".
| danans wrote:
| > Don't look back, look forward. You don't need to abandon
| KDE over the perceived lack of a single feature.
|
| It's not a single feature, tiling window managers are an
| entirely different paradigm that fit my programming workflows
| so much better. The constraints they impose are actually a
| good thing for me.
|
| I did say that I use a traditional desktop environment for
| tasks that are not driven by a text-based environment,
| although in a way that completely hides all desktop
| environment provided screen widgets, rendering the
| differences between KDE, Gnome, XFCE, etc moot. I handle
| window switching with things like Alt-Tab, which pretty much
| work the same in every environment.
|
| At some point if I switch to KDE, I'll definitely pick up
| your suggestions though!
| lallysingh wrote:
| Does anyone know what KDE activities actually are? Is there a
| concrete description somewhere?
| troyvit wrote:
| KDE Activities are a little bit like virtual desktops. If you
| set up 4 virtual desktops you can tab between them and keep
| specific stuff on each desktop. With Activities you hit a
| command key and you get a new set of desktops. It's almost like
| logging into a new, empty session but you can switch back to a
| previous activity easily.
|
| I used to use the same laptop at work as at home, so I added a
| Home activity. When I was done with work I'd hit [windows key]
| tab and work would disappear from my desktop and all my home
| stuff would be there.
| space_ghost wrote:
| They're broadly similar to Workspaces, except you can also
| apply different panel and desktop configurations to each
| Activity. From KDE: "Activities are a super-set of Virtual
| Desktops. They don't replace Virtual Desktops -- in fact, each
| Activity can have its own set of Virtual Desktops if you
| choose. Instead, Activities are alternative desktops, each of
| which can have its own wallpaper, icons, and widgets."
| jp_sc wrote:
| KDE activities are separated instances of all your desktops. So
| you can have a set of desktops with open applications,
| background images, etc. for "Work", and other for "Personal",
| for example.
| kmarc wrote:
| I found it interesting that they compare CD burning software and
| a music player. In 2017 I am not sure how relevant these software
| were...
|
| I myself haven't used CDs for around 10 years now. And apart from
| my love of ncmpp, I would also suppose the majority of desktop
| users would listen to music from a streamer service.
|
| I'd rather had a look on the Settings / configuration dialogs,
| file pickers (as it's been mentioned already) and other stuff
| that are relevant (and were relevant in 2017)
| simion314 wrote:
| For HN terminal app comparison would be nice. I am only
| familiar with Konsole and I am happy with it.
| AdmiralAsshat wrote:
| To my knowledge there aren't a whole lot of dedicated apps for
| streaming services. So the comparisons would be:
|
| - How a Spotify tab looks in a browser in KDE vs GNOME.
|
| - How the unofficial Spotify Flatpak looks in KDE vs GNOME.
| cuddlybacon wrote:
| So compare apps in other categories which have remained
| relevent: file browser, settings, calendar, reminders, notes,
| etc
| d0mdo0ss wrote:
| A few months ago I switched to gnome since it supports hidpi and
| fractional scaling, and it's snappy enough but somehow feels
| bloated in everyday use (ubuntu 20.04). I tried to switch back to
| xfce with a recent fix for fractional scaling, but it looked
| fuzzy on my screen no matter the resolution, so I had to abandon
| that for the time being. KDE was the default at my work and I've
| used it for many years, probably over a decade. The article says
| gnome is lighter, but that's not my impression, or maybe I'm
| missing something with gnome?
| mikece wrote:
| Is it really still an either/or choice between KDE and Gnome? I'm
| not a Linux expert but I thought there were more options than
| just these two. The article seems like it presents a false
| dichotomy.
| approxim8ion wrote:
| They're still the two biggest DEs on Linux, and also the
| flagships for Qt and GTK respectively.
| tetraca wrote:
| Besides KDE and GNOME (and some GNOME forks like Cinnamon),
| none of the other choices are particularly close to a decent
| full desktop experience. They are generally either limited in
| nature or require you to be one of those people that likes to
| dig around for hours cobbling together scripts and adjusting
| the minutiae of scattered, poorly documented config files
| exactly to their specification. I have certainly done all those
| things, but of all the people I know nobody else actually wants
| to basically fight with their machine like that. They would
| rather want a useful suite of easily discoverable applications
| that they can use right now, and a couple ways to personalize
| their machine in a cosmetic manner.
| ip34162 wrote:
| This is not true. Ubuntu MATE works ootb. Linux Mint Cinnamon
| works ootb. Both have GUI to install apps. Just like KDE and
| GNOME.
| mustermannBB wrote:
| Depends on the definition of "works ootb". For the most
| part I would say yes but a few little things here and there
| not, IMHO. It also depends on the distro but "ALt-Tab"
| through windows across workspaces (virtual desktops) often
| requires an install of dconf and setting it yourself. Just
| as a minor example. But that perhaps admittedly is
| nitpicking. Overall Mate works perfectly fine of course.
| gh-throw wrote:
| 1) They're usually the best-supported by major distros,,
|
| 2) Most other solutions don't present as much system-config
| stuff as well as they (or Windows, or macOS) do in the GUI, so
| you're in for more mucking about in config files, writing
| scripts, et c. with any of the many window managers (not
| "desktop environments" like Gnome or MATE or KDE)
| AdmiralAsshat wrote:
| HN hug of death?
|
| Here's an archive snapshot:
|
| https://web.archive.org/web/20210325135037/http://www.ocsmag...
| lelanthran wrote:
| Thanks, I thought it was just me
| abrowne wrote:
| (2017)
| gameswithgo wrote:
| I'm curious is anyone else feels like I do about these things.
| I've used linux off and on over the years, various distros,
| various GUIs, sometimes KDE based, sometimes Gnome, sometimes
| others. I've _never_ noticed any differences that seem
| substantive. It just seems like a random walk around the usual
| gui design space. Which I think makes sense as there isn 't
| really a whole lot to do there.
|
| Is it just me? Do other people feel strongly about any of these
| differences?
| ud_0 wrote:
| I switched to Linux/Gnome from macOS about 3 years ago. From my
| perspective, they're both frustrating in different ways, but I
| would be okay using either one. Gnome is too simplistic and
| opinionated, KDE is too heavy and fragile (but I also don't
| have a lot of experience with it).
|
| Overall, Desktop Linux works well enough for me to live with
| it. A few years earlier, that was not an option if you wanted
| to live a relatively normal computing life without missing out
| on too much or spending an inordinate amount of time on keeping
| your system alive.
| jrm4 wrote:
| I'll go a step further and say that these projects end up being
| net harmful to the Linux space precisely because they're
| seeking a goal that the last 10-15 years has proven that they
| are _not good at._
|
| The goal is something like "a unified Mac-like system space,"
| but as people here have correctly noted, I don't think its
| possible to bring a bunch of developers together to create a
| universally "nice" space unless one of them is named Steve
| Jobs.
|
| What makes it worse is that we have these two large projects
| with a lot of good history behind them that nonetheless have
| not really done anything good (in terms of a unified
| experience, many of the individual apps are great) recently.
| They have a lot of the mindshare and very little to show for
| it.
|
| Obviously, developers are free to run their projects how they
| wish, but my wish is that they'd wake up and realize they're
| not Apple; but there is something they could do that would
| actually be helpful. Not try to work on carving out their own
| space -- but the opposite -- try to figure out how to create
| modular parts of a workspace that really work well together and
| across WMs and platforms.
|
| Until then, I'll do what I've been doing, which is Openbox plus
| the things I need and like. I see cool things in Gnome and KDE
| that I'd love to have, but then they bring the rest of their
| baggage that just gets in the way, so no.
| johannes1234321 wrote:
| It depends a bit on what you do and use. If you primarily use a
| terminal, Firefox and thunderbird there isn't much of a
| difference between those. Yeah, taskbar etc look a bit
| different but not much.
|
| If you switch between KDE and Gnome apps (kedit vs gnome-edit,
| kmail vs gnome evolution, KDE dolphin vs. Gnome nautilus,
| kmines vs. Gnome mines game ...) you see more of the
| differences in App Design principles.
| EdwardDiego wrote:
| I'm in the same boat. Switched from Gnome on Pop_OS to KDE on
| Arch Linux and well, they both work, I guess?
|
| I mean, I'm using Linux to work, so as long as I can pull up a
| terminal, run Zoom, run my browser, and run IDEA, I'm sorted,
| I'm not overly fussed about what the MP3 players look like, I
| can just open Spotify in a browser if I need tunes.
| macksd wrote:
| My preferences aren't religious-strong, but I have enough of a
| preference that I installed KDE Plasma on Pop! OS instead of
| the Gnome-base default. And I've struggled to get the network
| manager working in KDE which has been a nuisance and never a
| problem on distros who ship KDE as the default - so there's at
| least some importance in a distro's default, even if others are
| available. I've been known to pull up a Gnome version of some
| application in KDE and vice-versa because of individual
| preferences. But as a desktop / window manager yeah I actually
| have a strong preference.
|
| The article actually isn't loading for me, so I'm not sure if
| these are the same design philosophies addressed, but some of
| the key things are:
|
| * I find Gnome's dock-like things very annoying. I find it
| easier to get KDE's task bar to take up a very small number of
| pixels and I feel it stays out of my way more while I'm
| focusing on other applications. It feels like Gnome takes after
| Mac and KDE takes after Windows, and I just prefer the latter,
| UI-wise.
|
| * KDE is far more configurable for keyboard shortcuts. I use
| the ability to pin a window to the left / right half, or one of
| the quadrants using they key-binding of my choice all the time.
| I hadn't been using KDE for very long when I would miss that
| every time I was on another machine. Even after being back on
| Gnome for a couple of years I wanted it. There are some third-
| party add-ons that do it, but they were buggy for me. I'd
| rather just have KDE out-of-the-box. This is one example, but
| keyboard shortcuts in general are for more widely used and
| configurable on KDE.
|
| edit: Clarified a few things, but also have now read the
| article: yes I like this "completist" philosophy, especially
| since much of the complexity is hidden away in drop-down menus.
| I think it's the best of both worlds.
| mustermannBB wrote:
| My problem with KDE has essentially been the same now for
| years. To me, it feels too fragile.
| ip34162 wrote:
| Try KDE Neon. It has the latest Plasma on top of stable
| Ubuntu LTS.
|
| https://neon.kde.org/
|
| Also KDE Connect is awesome for integration with android
| phones. It's available in non-KDE distros too. Available on
| Fdroid too.
|
| https://kdeconnect.kde.org/
|
| https://f-droid.org/packages/org.kde.kdeconnect_tp/
| simion314 wrote:
| I am familiar with KDE and years ago when I was in the
| community I know that most of the apps are just a few unpaid
| volunteers/developers, in their free time add missing features
| and fix bugs. There was no big ego designer that had to approve
| if we add a new menu or feature or any study to decide if a new
| feature might segfault the brain of some user. Each maintainer
| decides if a feature makes sense and the design was usually the
| generic Qt/KDE layouts , no freacking custom widgets that a
| user can't theme.
|
| I would be interested to hear if there is a major difference
| between GTK apps that are not part of GNOME and GNOME first
| apps .
| skinkestek wrote:
| I am opinionated. To each their own, here are my opinions:
|
| KDE is near Windows defaults, maximum configuration (you can
| even emulate Mac OS X if you want.)
|
| Gnome 2 was Windows-like and somewhat customizable.
|
| Gnome 3 is Mac-like and harder to customize.
|
| Unity is Mac-like and unnecessary hard to customize.
|
| Elementary looks Mac-like but isn't rage-inducing in the same
| way for me as they have a working application switcher.
| 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
| Terminal. Check
|
| Web browser. Check
|
| They're the same
| eldaisfish wrote:
| I do not feel strongly about any of this but i've found myself
| happier with KDE over the years.
|
| Gnome seems to combine the worst aspects of OSX and windows
| with some things in side panel, some persistent menu bars, some
| applications with double menu bars... it's annoying is all.
|
| KDE tends to stick to what i understand and what i want is
| usually where i expect it to be.
|
| I would disagree with you in that the differences are
| substantive.
| munchbunny wrote:
| I've used both Gnome and KDE based UI's, and yeah, I don't feel
| strongly about the differences, but also I've never felt like
| either one was actually _good_. They both get the job done, but
| they both feel designed by developers for developers, on the
| assumption that anything you can 't figure out in the UI you'll
| Google or open a terminal and text editor to deal with it.
| Compared to, say, the iPad 2 which felt clearly designed for
| lay users down to the settings UI. (I feel like the later
| versions of iOS got more complex and harder to parse, so I'm
| picking the iteration I liked the most.)
|
| But then again, it's Linux, I'm a developer, I'm used to
| Googling how to do things, and I play my video games on
| Windows, so 90%+ of my time in Linux is in the terminal, text
| editor (or IDE), and browser anyway. So no complaints - the
| presence of a fully featured UI isn't why I use Linux.
| inetknght wrote:
| > * they both feel designed by developers for developers*
|
| As a developer, I disagree.
|
| KDE's interface is often broken and/or unintuitive for what I
| want to do. At least it usually provides the levers if
| they're hard to use or find.
|
| Gnome's interface is almost always too simplified and doesn't
| present the powerful levers at all unless you go digging
| behind the scenes and hope that an update doesn't break some
| "private" implementation detail.
| ip34162 wrote:
| KDE recently improved it's interface.
|
| https://kde.org/announcements/plasma/5/5.21.0/
|
| If anyone want to try the latest KDE Plasma, KDE Neon has
| it on top of a stable Ubuntu LTS base.
|
| https://neon.kde.org/
| munchbunny wrote:
| > _KDE 's interface is often broken and/or unintuitive for
| what I want to do. At least it usually provides the levers
| if they're hard to use or find._
|
| I'm not so sure that we're saying different things. I
| didn't mean it as a compliment, more as an explanation. In
| general developers aren't good at designing UX (not their
| job), and in general developers are used to often byzantine
| UX, including falling back to terminal rituals, and both
| UI's feel (to me) like they're 80% of the way there and
| left that way because of the tacit understanding that
| there's always the terminal and text configs.
| lelanthran wrote:
| I dislike comparisons like this; it's very easy to cherry pick
| the worst examples of A and the best examples of B.
|
| For example, why didn't they compare the file-chooser dialog? Is
| the gnome one still unable to display a list of thumbnails, and
| instead require the user to click on each file to show a preview?
| Good luck if you are looking for a single image in a directory
| that has more than 50 or so.
|
| That's a common, daily need all users have - pick a file in a
| dialog, and yet the last time I used Gnome it was broken and had
| been that way for decades.
| Jonnax wrote:
| This is quite old. I think Amarok's Qt5 port didn't get finished,
| and I think Elisa is the new KDE music player:
|
| https://invent.kde.org/multimedia/elisa
|
| Also CD Burning? I think even in 2017 PCs and Laptops didn't come
| with CD drives.
|
| Personally, I like KDE for the small touches. Like the file
| browser having an integrated terminal that follows the
| directories you're browsing.
|
| If you want to see what the KDE's Design Guidelines are look
| here:
|
| https://develop.kde.org/hig/
|
| And GNOME's is here:
|
| https://developer.gnome.org/hig/stable/
|
| Perhaps it's worth doing a 2021 comparison?
| _ZeD_ wrote:
| According to [1] there is a "new" amarok in alpha... but I fear
| that the steam has gone
|
| [1] https://amarok.kde.org/en/node/890
| bmn__ wrote:
| > I think Elisa is the new KDE music player
|
| Just installed it. Holy fuzzy fuckballs, what a punch in the
| gut. There are icons, but no buttons and menus. Can't figure
| out how to add a music file, so the program fails at its
| fundamental task. Disabled icons are not greyed out and have no
| tooltips. 20% of the space is taken away by some blue-green bar
| with a big honking picture of a CD. The separator widgets
| between the columns don't change the mouse cursor into a left-
| right double headed arrow.
|
| What were they thinking? This can't possibly be HIG compliant.
| Is everyone at the helm asleep? This would never have passed as
| official project during era KDE 3.
| billfruit wrote:
| Anyone think that ubuntu around 2011, final days of Gnome 2,
| really had perfected the desktop UI experience, before all the
| forays into wanton novelty for noveltys sake made it the
| confusing mess it became later?
|
| To think that a linux distro had the almost ideal desktop UI
| realised and then squandered it all away, seems puzzling now.
| gh-throw wrote:
| I thought they started going to hell when they had that botched
| too-early integration of (resource-sucking, to add insult to
| injury) PulseAudio, in... '08? '09? I remember it was back when
| Flash was still big, and opening Flash content on that Ubuntu
| release would, IIRC, _crash X_ , reliably, because of
| PulseAudio, in addition to its general bugginess, lots of audio
| stuff that had "just worked" for years suddenly being fiddly
| and broken, and absurd levels of memory & processor cycle use
| for PA (I'm not sure whether PulseAudio ever got those under
| control, or we just started using faster computers so no-one
| cares about the audio subsystem sucking up tens of MB of memory
| while idle, anymore).
|
| Flash was still big enough that there's no possible way they
| didn't know they were crashing with it. Zero chance no-one at
| Canonical had tried it, and discovered the problem. Released it
| anyway.
| prewett wrote:
| PulseAudio was the last straw that pushed me to get a Mac.
| When I switched to Ubuntu, wifi worked, sleep (and more to
| the point, wake) on my T42 worked, and audio worked. Each
| release after that something would break, and but you
| couldn't really work around PulseAudio very well.
| gh-throw wrote:
| Yeah, I had no idea PA was even a thing (and I guess it
| kinda wasn't yet, which is part of why the release was so
| rough) so that was a rude surprise when my whole system
| just... broke, on upgrade, in a ton of ways that they _had
| to have_ known about. Especially when it was over audio,
| which was the one part of Linux that hadn 't given me any
| trouble whatsoever since like 2002. I still kinda hold a
| grudge against Ubuntu and PA over that (in the case of PA
| it's also because, I'm pretty sure between that and
| SystemD, Poettering and I have _very different_ ideas of
| what an appropriate level of engineering design-quality is
| for fundamental system components, and what quality design
| looks like--in fact I 'd say he's the _main_ reason I 've
| become more distant from Linux over the last ~decade)
| ip34162 wrote:
| PipeWire (from the guy behind Gstreamer) is coming. Seems
| like it won't be anything like PulseAudio. The future seems
| exciting.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PipeWire
| majewsky wrote:
| There was an LWN article about PipeWire [1] a while back.
| Among the interesting parts of the article was an
| explanation for the PulseAudio debacle, and why PipeWire
| likely doesn't have the same problem. Basically,
| PulseAudio exercised several kernel APIs that had existed
| in ALSA for a long time, but had not been used widely.
| Hence it uncovered a ton of bugs in device drivers that
| were not tested against applications using these function
| calls before. By now, all those bugs are fixed because
| PulseAudio is widely used. PipeWire is using mostly the
| same APIs as PulseAudio and Jack, so it's not going to
| have the same troubles as PulseAudio.
|
| [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26327779
| ptsneves wrote:
| I disagree. Gnome3 for me is perfect. I think tastes are tastes
| but gnome 3 gives me the function as well aesthetics.
|
| The zoom out functionality to show all windows open is
| essential given i have a lot of windows open at the same time.
| Alt-tab icons are a huge cognitive load.
| dorfsmay wrote:
| I agree. GNOME 3 stays out of my way.
|
| Good dynamic virtual desktop.
|
| Windows key (or Alt-F1) to see all open windows.
|
| Windows keys + typing to start an app.
|
| I don't understand why Tweaks is not part of GNOME vanilla,
| but it's easy enough to install.
|
| I have to work on Windows and Mac OS when working for some
| customers and that is an absolutely miserable experience for
| me.
| BiteCode_dev wrote:
| We had all this with Gnome 2, although you had to apt-get
| install it.
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| A lot of the compiz stuff still blows things away today.
| But truthfully, while I liked it, I didn't need it.
| throwaway8581 wrote:
| If I recall correctly it didn't have a dock. Everyone seems to
| have settled on the dock being the best paradigm for managing
| open apps, and launching favorites, for most users. You might
| disagree, but the ux people at Apple, Microsoft, Google, Gnome,
| and KDE seem to think it's the best approach for the vast
| majority of users.
| prewett wrote:
| Microsoft doesn't have a dock does it? It's not in my Windows
| 10 installation, which has this weird combo of Awesome Bar +
| lag and Start Menu. Unless maybe it's an option I'm not aware
| of (as I actively try to avoid time in Windows)
|
| I don't really trust GNOME and KDE to have done actual UI
| research. Maybe Google did, but given the Android experience,
| I strongly doubt it.
|
| So that leaves Apple as believing in the dock, Microsoft with
| their task bar thing they've had ever since Win95, and
| everyone else copying Apple. So it might be the settled
| approach, but "best" seems like it is really overselling it.
| It seems to me everyone beside Microsoft thinks that Apple's
| approach is good enough that they can't think of a better
| one. (Which is fine by me, I like the dock as long as it
| hides properly)
| throwaway8581 wrote:
| The Windows task bar these days behaves almost exactly like
| the Mac OS dock and has since Windows 7. The main
| difference is if you click on an application with multiple
| windows open, it pops up a window selector (tip, ctrl+click
| to cycle through the windows instead) instead of whatever
| Mac OS does (some combo of bring up the main/latest-used
| window of the application). You can enable the Vista and
| earlier behavior--listing all open windows and not grouping
| by application--but I imagine very few people do.
| wayneftw wrote:
| The Microsoft taskbar has always had the most prominent
| feature of the dock: Allowing you to organize and launch
| apps from a bar on the left/right/bottom of your screen.
| Prior to Windows 7 though, you could only add shortcuts to
| the taskbar and when you launched an app from that shortcut
| a wholly separate taskbar button would appear.
|
| Starting with Windows 7, Microsoft merged the functionality
| of launching apps into the taskbar buttons. This way, when
| you "pin" an app to the taskbar and then click on the
| pinned item, the pinned item became the taskbar button
| which represented the running app. This is how the Mac dock
| works. I think that the only major feature of the Mac dock
| that Microsoft doesn't offer is "recent apps" but I could
| be forgetting something since I haven't used Windows for
| work in a while.
|
| In the end, as per usual, Microsoft lets you have it both
| ways. If you want a dock you can leave the taskbar
| configured as default (grouping taskbar buttons and
| collapsing them into a single button) or you can turn that
| off and have the original taskbar functionality. If you add
| something like 7+ Taskbar Tweaker you can even ungroup
| them, drag and drop taskbar buttons to re-organize them and
| enable "middle click" to close the window represented by
| the taskbar buttons like you would with browser tabs.
|
| When I moved my workstations/work laptop all to
| Manjaro/XFCE I was happily surprised to find that XFCE
| taskbar has all the features of 7+ Taskbar Tweaker. I don't
| know what XFCE's design philosophy is, but if I had to
| guess it's "Implement all the desirable features of Windows
| in a minimalist fashion and add features for power users."
| ip34162 wrote:
| Ubuntu MATE, which looks like GNOME 2, has option to enable
| dock.
|
| https://ubuntu-mate.org/features/panel/
|
| Linux Mint has a MATE flavor, so it too might have it.
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| Yes, at that point it was approaching Windows 2000 with a much
| better terminal experience. A "workstation" experience. We all
| know how things went after tablet mania took over.
|
| I still use Ubuntu Mate today, closest I've found to the
| earlier peak and still supported.
| ip34162 wrote:
| Ubuntu MATE has the GNOME 2 look. Linux Mint has a mate flavor
| too I think.
| rodelrod wrote:
| I agree that was a local maximum, but I'd say peak Linux-on-
| Desktop was Ubuntu 16.04 with Unity 7. I'm hoping that Gnome 3
| + Pop Shell will take us to the next peak, but except for the
| awesome tiling we're still below the 2 previous maximums in the
| "everything-just-works" department.
| pantalaimon wrote:
| Gnome 2 got forked as Mate, you can still have that very same
| Desktop Experience in 2021, complete with Compiz.
| nycticorax wrote:
| This. One million times this.
| garaetjjte wrote:
| >To think that a linux distro had the almost ideal desktop UI
| realised and then squandered it all away, seems puzzling now.
|
| Hard to say how much truth is in this story, but there was some
| speculation that this was caused by Microsoft. They started to
| make some noise about Linux desktop infringing their patents,
| and while Novell (who was contributing to KDE) signed patent-
| sharing deal, neither Red Hat nor Canonical (big contributors
| to GNOME) did, presumably choosing redesign instead.
|
| https://www.theregister.com/2013/06/03/thank_microsoft_for_l...
| BiteCode_dev wrote:
| I'm still on Unity, and will probably delay update for a long
| time because I just cause use Gnome 3.
|
| It's not for lack of trying, but it requires to many plugins to
| be just usable, and then they break, some features is missing
| in nautilus or other shit.
|
| I don't want to fight with my desktop manager. I have work to
| do.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-03-25 23:04 UTC)