[HN Gopher] Exploring System76's New Rust Based Desktop Environment
___________________________________________________________________
Exploring System76's New Rust Based Desktop Environment
Author : Parseus
Score : 293 points
Date : 2022-01-13 18:43 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (blog.edfloreshz.dev)
(TXT) w3m dump (blog.edfloreshz.dev)
| dnautics wrote:
| I wanted to be able to move the applet bar to not the top of the
| screen, because I have two monitors and I like to spread vscode
| over two monitors -- top section for code, bottom section for
| console (for my purposes vscode console is, sadly, strictly
| better than the builtin linux console because it
| opportunistically makes IO output that references file:line
| clickable). I was able to do this in linux mint, but not in
| PopOS.
| NotVerstappen wrote:
| I think I would've tried Pop!_OS by now if not for the name - I
| know it is totally irrational, but having a ! in there really
| pisses me off.
| CoastalCoder wrote:
| It's not just you.
|
| I have trouble going near CockroachDB because of its name. It's
| absolutely unjustifiable from an engineering perspective, but
| the effect (for me, at least) is real.
| rectang wrote:
| My favorite example of reasonable name-inspired revulsion was
| an outfit called "Ink Competent Printers".
| nonameiguess wrote:
| I always took that to be a reference to "it's so robust,
| it'll survive nuclear winter," which is pretty cool if true.
| The last database standing after all other species die off.
| wtetzner wrote:
| Maybe they should have named it "TwinkieDB".
| dTal wrote:
| Fun fact: the supposed extreme hardiness of cockroaches is
| something of a myth, and in particular they are not fond of
| cold (hence their affinity for human domiciles!)
|
| They should rename to TardigradeDB.
| jakear wrote:
| Their nuclear hardiness however has been experimentally
| validated [1], though flour beetles survived even better
| than cockroaches.
|
| Either way, both using CockroachDB and participating in
| this thread put cockroaches on my mind a lot more than
| I'd really prefer. +1 for TardigradeDB.
|
| [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxCYQvGNoGY
| Okawari wrote:
| I have a few of those projects as well.
|
| MongoDB because mongo is a derogartory word in my language.
| It is an abbreviation of Mongoloid, was (apparently) used to
| describe people with Down syndrome, thought I've never heard
| it used for that. It's more colloquially used to describe
| people who act wierd or something that are stupid or made in
| a wierd way.
|
| Svelte, the javascript framework is also something I've kind
| of avoided so far due to its name. While it doesn't really
| mean anything in my native tongue as far as I know, it is a
| very plausible word/spelling and it kinda just sounds
| unappealing. I can't help but reading it like that either.
| choward wrote:
| Same here. I know naming things is hard but they went out of
| the way to make it extra terrible. Stick to letters and maybe
| numbers if you want the version in the name.
| Darmody wrote:
| My coworkers joke about me using a OS called Pop. I don't mind
| it, I even like it, but I have to admit that Pop it's a very
| ugly name.
| dnautics wrote:
| the mere fact that you call it pop tells me you're not ready
| unethical_ban wrote:
| It makes it easier to search for support.
| sedatk wrote:
| Not just that, the bang before the underscore makes it extra
| painful for me as a programmer. It screams "syntax error."
| rpdillon wrote:
| Totally agree. I got over it and installed it and was stunned
| that it was as good as it was. Now it's installed on pretty
| much every machine I own. I recommend trying it!
| 999900000999 wrote:
| But is it going to be faster, what I really want out of a Linux
| desktop is for it to look nice, but not eat up in indefinite
| amount of RAM.
| chungy wrote:
| "There's no visible distinction between the window title bar and
| the body of the window."
|
| Strikes me as a bit amusing, as this was the case also in early
| versions of GNOME 3. I believe it was abandoned because non-GNOME
| apps (or more specifically, ones that didn't follow the GNOME
| HIG) had a visible distinction and greater consistency was
| desired. Changing GNOME's own look was the way to do so.
| Animats wrote:
| Or between what's clickable and what isn't.
|
| (New dark pattern: popups which have an X box to dismiss them
| being harder to dismiss. First, the box around the X
| disappeared. Then, the X moves to different places in the box.
| (Bing does this for their house ads.) Then, the active portion
| of the X shrinks to make it harder to hit.)
| chungy wrote:
| Also in the earlier versions, the area you could click to
| move a window around was significantly larger. Down into the
| menu bar and toolbars.
|
| That pattern did get scaled back. A few GNOME apps still do
| it, but most only allow it on the title bar now.
| bee_rider wrote:
| None of that is handled by the window manager though, right?
| Animats wrote:
| No, that's web. But this new window manager seems designed
| to bring web-like behavior to the desktop.
| anthk wrote:
| I don't like Rust, but between Gnome's JS abortion lagfest and
| Rust, please, use the second.
| brink wrote:
| I don't get to meet people who dislike Rust very often. Why
| don't you like it?
| qsdf38100 wrote:
| my 2 cents: rust evangelists, the promises of the end of
| bugs, and how perfect the language is for any use case...
| that makes my BS detector go off. Everyone has to love Rust
| nowadays, it sounds like a cult or something. It makes me
| hate rust without even having tried it, which is dumb and
| sad.
| kangalioo wrote:
| Yep
|
| Whenever a new tool appears whose existence is justified by
| being "written in Rust" I cringe a little. I'm a happy Rust
| user, but I wish people would use the language to make cool
| stuff, not just spread the language for the sake of the
| language
| gefhfffh wrote:
| Don't be sad. You realizing that your emotions get in your
| way is already half of the solution. M
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| Koshkin wrote:
| Would you rate KDE (Plasma) better?
| anthk wrote:
| It's good, but I'd prefer XFCE as a balance between
| minimalism and functionality.
|
| I use fluxbox + rox but XFCE would the closest DE to my
| setup.
| cosmojg wrote:
| Yes. Not only does it run better, but it's also a better
| managed project.
| LeoPanthera wrote:
| I use Plasma. Of all the DEs it is probably the most buggy,
| but I continue to use it because it is the only one that
| doesn't force an ideology onto me. It is so insanely
| configurable that you can make it whatever you want.
|
| It's also still mouse-first, and has not been redesigning
| itself for touch screens.
| blinkingled wrote:
| Not sure if you have tried recent versions of Plasma but
| they have made a great deal of progress on all fronts
| including fixing a lot of bugs. I don't encounter any on
| day to day basis on Tumbleweed which gets you the latest
| version.
| LeoPanthera wrote:
| I am in fact running Tumbleweed as well.
|
| Maybe it's just because I don't live in the happy path
| but I still encounter bugs daily.
| Narishma wrote:
| Here's a small one I encounter on a daily basis on
| Tumbleweed: the update notifications scrolling is broken.
| It scrolls the list of updates super slowly and goes back
| to the top when it reaches the end instead of just
| stopping.
|
| Another small one: I've set the panel to auto-hide. It
| works fine for the most part but occasionally it will
| stay visible until I minimize and restore any window.
| troyvit wrote:
| The only nit I'd pick is that while it might be mouse-first
| KDE is also amazingly usable and configurable via keyboard,
| especially for a DE that looks so vanilla out of the box.
| apatheticonion wrote:
| Great to see!
|
| Selfishly, as a MacOS refugee and someone who has an on/off
| relationship with using desktop Linux as my main (and a desire to
| use it daily); I would love it if there was a shameless clone of
| the MacOS DE for Linux.
|
| I don't care for customisation, I just want a sensible default
| that I can get up and running with immediately.
| pxc wrote:
| > I don't care for customisation, I just want a sensible
| default that I can get up and running with immediately.
|
| Why's GNOME not good enough for this use case?
| apatheticonion wrote:
| Gnome41 on Debian Bookworm is my current setup and am
| actually typing this comment from there.
|
| I use it about once a week and as far as I can tell, Gnome40+
| is giving off signs that I might be able to use it as a daily
| driver (for work).
|
| Looking forward to the updated Files application and whatever
| else is coming in G42.
|
| That said, there are a lot of design choices that cater more
| to mobile form factors and the desktop experience suffers as
| a result.
|
| Then there are non DE related issues like application
| installation. Chromium has bizarre window and mouse
| performance issues related to Wayland. Graphics card drivers
| are difficult to install, even as someone who knows how to
| read documentation. Flatpak has a permissions structure that
| doesn't always make sense for certain applications (like OBS,
| Discord, IDEs) and installing applications using a package
| manager is very hit and miss (e.g. OBS is broken in Debian
| Bookworm when installed via apt because of a qt5 dependency)
|
| I don't mean to sound negative - I only complain because I
| love Linux and want to be able to go to my friends and
| colleagues and say "you can use this" - feeling confident
| that they will have an experience on par with MacOS.
| yepthatsreality wrote:
| > I would love it if there was a shameless clone of the MacOS
| DE for Linux.
|
| Elementary OS
| apatheticonion wrote:
| It's a great approximation, but I haven't had a lot of
| success using Elementary.
|
| The best experience I have had so far is Gnome41 on Debian
| Bookworm (my current setup which I log into about once a
| week) - though the DE has some design choices that cater more
| to mobile desktop environments at the expense of desktop
| usability (I don't want to appear ungrateful towards the
| volunteers developing it, it's a great project and I know
| critique is easy).
|
| I'm talking about a complete rip off. Things like per-window
| virtual desktops, screenshot/video recording via hotkey. The
| global menu. The rock solid stability. Window decorations,
| spacing, fonts and overall feel. MacOS's DE _feels_ really
| solid.
| gorjusborg wrote:
| tannr wrote:
| Go-go System76, life has to be fun why to keep suffering?
| Mikeb85 wrote:
| Why aren't they working on making a laptop in-house? This seems
| like a massive diversion and waste of time...
| wmf wrote:
| They clearly don't have enough money to change their hardware
| strategy.
| jjice wrote:
| Pop_OS is a large product of theirs, even if it's open source.
| It's one of the killer parts of the System76 line up in my
| opinion.
| Mikeb85 wrote:
| How? Is anyone going to buy a System76 laptop over a Dell XPS
| laptop or a ThinkPad because Pop!OS comes pre-installed
| instead of Ubuntu/Fedora?
| deadbunny wrote:
| Probably not but I can easily imagine people currently
| using Pop considering System76 for their next laptop.
| skavi wrote:
| Looks like the Android 4.0 UI with a bit of neumorphism thrown
| in. I really don't like it. I hope that's not the style they end
| up with. The GTK window conveys the same information more clearly
| (and it looks better).
| michaelmrose wrote:
| Looks like it is already better than gnome settings.
|
| >The search also displays a list of all the settings that match
| the search criteria and not only where they're located as GNOME
| Settings does, this makes it easier to change your settings
| without having to leave the section you currently are in.
|
| >the search bar is available at the top of the navigation view,
| this is problematic when inside nested menus as the user has to
| go back to the begining to access it, but in COSMIC it's
| available everywhere in the app, no matter how deep inside a
| menu the user is.
| smoldesu wrote:
| Definitely. When I saw the new settings app my jaw hit the
| floor, I think GNOME's team is going to have a serious fire
| lit under their ass now that there's a new kid in town
| finessing their toolkit like a pro.
| Andrew_nenakhov wrote:
| Gnome team is busy killing their projects for so long, that
| they won't even notice.
| addicted wrote:
| Does that have anything to do with the DE though? Isn't that
| a change that could have simply been made to the Gnome
| settings itself?
| zkldi wrote:
| That padding is genuinely terrible.
| diskzero wrote:
| Original Nautilus and early GNOME developer here. I am very out
| of touch with what is current, so excuse some possibly ignorant
| questions. How is this a Rust-based environment if it is based on
| GTK? I assume GTK is still essentially the C-based GTK we used
| with some improvements.
|
| Why is this called Rust-based? I'll do some more research but
| would like to get some insight from more knowledgeable sources.
| [deleted]
| Narishma wrote:
| GTK is just a library, you can use it from any language it has
| bindings for.
| jandrese wrote:
| The issue is that Rust is extremely opinionated at to how
| code should be structured and there is going to be
| considerable interface friction with a system that is built
| around aliasing data every time there is a callback.
| acdha wrote:
| Do you have an example of that friction? Looking through
| the docs at e.g. https://gtk-
| rs.org/gtk4-rs/stable/latest/book/hello_world.ht... it
| doesn't seem that bad but not having used it I would be
| curious how it works out once you're building a serious
| app.
| jandrese wrote:
| Things are already getting quite hairy by page 4[1] of
| that link. And that example is showing data completely
| owned by the GObject. If you need to pass a mutable
| reference to third party data to a GObject it's not going
| to work in Rust. Imagine a button that you click to
| change the contents a GtkTreeModel connected to a
| GtkTreeView--you're going to need to work hard. You're
| going to write a fair bit Rust specific glue code to work
| around these issues.
|
| [1] https://gtk-
| rs.org/gtk4-rs/stable/latest/book/gobject_memory...
| rollcat wrote:
| Asking as someone who's never spent significant
| time/effort working with Gtk/GObject in C (only a bit in
| Python). Isn't it still generally desirable to have the
| compiler yell at you, if you can't convince it you know
| what you're doing? Rather than allowing the possibility
| of memory corruption.
|
| I do agree that the code in the example is far from
| beautiful. I wonder if we were to redesign GObject from
| scratch, if we could make interfacing with Python, Rust,
| JS, etc a bit less hairy.
| diskzero wrote:
| Understood. I have made significant contributions to GTK. My
| contributions possibly had memory leaks or memory corruption
| issues that will bring down the higher Rust layer. I am
| trying to understand the purpose of the Rust layer. It is
| fine with me if it is because Rust is interesting, but what
| is being presented doesn't seem like a Rust desktop
| environment _to me_.
| IshKebab wrote:
| It's not 100% Rust but I think you would expect that GTK
| itself is fairly well tested - probably much better tested
| than any new app you write that uses it, so it is still
| worth it to write that app in Rust.
|
| And it has to be said that memory safety isn't Rust's
| _only_ compelling feature. It also has a pretty great build
| system, a decent library ecosystem, a very strong type
| system which gives you an "if it compiles it works"
| experience surprisingly often, probably the best
| multithreading system, etc. etc.
| ranfdev wrote:
| I've made some small contributions to gtk-rs-core (the
| library providing rust bindings to glib, gdk...).
|
| While the lower layers written in C do impact the overall
| safety, the bindings are made to be as safe as possible.
|
| For example: every glib parameter that may take NULL in
| Rust becomes an Option<T>.
|
| GObject's methods are defined on traits and checked by the
| Rust type system. There are also some macros to provide an
| easy and safe interface to the GLib type system.
|
| All of this directly applies to gtk-rs.
|
| Overall, the bindings are well documented and with many
| examples. There's even a book. Also, there's a great
| community around them.
|
| Bindings website: https://gtk-rs.org/
| Taywee wrote:
| The big selling point of Rust in respect to these kinds of
| scenarios is that it's very often that a C or C++ library
| says things like "You must not call function CallAfterFoo
| before function Foo is called", or "Once you call
| DestroyObject, that object must not be used again", or "You
| must not call SomethingDangerous while a
| ResourceOwningObject exists", and so on and so on.
|
| In well-tested libraries like GTK, SQLite, Curl, and such,
| they are often quite robust just based on having been
| heavily developed and tested by many people over a very
| long time, and there are still ways that they can be
| misused and abused that are usually well-documented and
| warned against. A well-developed Rust wrapper actually
| makes it impossible to misuse one of these libraries from
| Rust, and therefore better enables a much smaller team of
| developers to write secure, robust applications. Rust can
| guarantee these documented restrictions at the type level
| and even make impossible many error conditions.
|
| So even though the UI is GTK, Rust still enables developers
| to write more robust applications with less fear.
| Personally, I find that GTK with Rust is a very pleasant
| experience. It's less about guaranteeing that the lower
| libraries have no bugs and more about preventing people
| from interacting with the libraries in dangerous or buggy
| ways.
| pxc wrote:
| I agree! I think they're just using Rust because they'd
| rather use it than C, not because they need safety
| guarantees for the DE applications.
| amarshall wrote:
| The answer seems to be that the applications [1] are written in
| Rust using gtk-rs [2] (Rust-bindings for the GTK libs).
|
| [1]: https://github.com/orgs/pop-
| os/repositories?q=&type=source&l...
|
| [2]: https://gtk-rs.org/
| sprash wrote:
| Also GTK4 means they are still at the mercy of GNOME which
| changes APIs often and without consideration for third parties.
|
| Wasn't the whole point of the project to emancipate themselves
| from GNOME? If they rely on GTK they will fail.
| cyber_kinetist wrote:
| Then they would need to either
|
| 1) do the yak-shaving and create a whole new GUI stack in
| Rust (which would be an absolute boon to the Rust community
| but will be a tremendous effort), or
|
| 2) switch to Qt (and basically become KDE)
|
| Thinking about it, maybe Sciter (https://sciter.com/) would
| be an okay foundation to build a DE in (lightweight stack,
| flexible theming, solid Rust bindings). But then it isn't
| open source (only the interface is, you need to pay for
| source access), so maybe not.
| kaba0 wrote:
| Regarding 2, aren't they basically gnome if they are using
| gtk, as per your logic?
| CameronNemo wrote:
| _create a whole new GUI stack in Rust_
|
| Is there a reason iced is not good enough (other than not
| being accessible)?
|
| https://iced.rs/
|
| https://github.com/iced-rs/iced/issues/552
| pure_simplicity wrote:
| No stable release yet, and you generally want your DE to
| be the most dependable bug-free part of your software,
| especially if you are selling hardware with your own
| software pre-installed.
|
| but looking good so far, gonna check this out for myself.
| I was rooting for azul, but iced seems to be further
| ahead
| gnud wrote:
| I'm assuming Iced has no A11 support (these projects
| never do). Probably no RTL support. Possibly no reusable
| "system" widgets like open/save dialogs.
| CameronNemo wrote:
| Can you clarify what you mean by "these projects never
| do"? Your comment comes across as dismissive. Especially
| since I already noted that it was lacking a11y in my
| original comment.
|
| Anyway although a11y and i18n support have not been
| implemented, they are planned.
|
| https://github.com/iced-rs/iced/issues/250
| mixedCase wrote:
| With the transition from version 3 to 4, GTK is now more
| focused on being a generic UI toolkit, with GTK4-based
| libadwaita now being the place to be for GNOME-specific
| patterns.
| sprash wrote:
| History and experience tells a different story [1]. Never
| trust a library that is maintained by GNOME.
|
| 1.: https://github.com/thestinger/termite
| ijidak wrote:
| I know we developers love our languages.
|
| But I'm always skeptical when underlying language choice is
| featured prominently as a selling point for any new project.
|
| It tells me, this is a technology-first, users-second enthusiast
| project.
|
| And thus, I'll be surprised if it tackles the deepest issues
| users need solved.
|
| That doesn't mean it isn't cool as a proof of concept for a new
| or popular language.
|
| It just makes me question to what extent it's going to solve the
| deepest problems with similar or older projects it is competing
| against.
| stjohnswarts wrote:
| It's not. They use rust for a LOT of things at system76 and
| it's their preferred language on starting new projects. It's
| not a "proof of concept". This is on their roadmap to get done
| and be used as the default DE for pop.
| SkyMarshal wrote:
| _> But I 'm always skeptical when underlying language choice is
| featured prominently as a selling point for any new project._
|
| _> It tells me, this is a technology-first, users-second
| enthusiast project._
|
| _> And thus, I 'll be surprised if it tackles the deepest
| issues users need solved._
|
| Some of the deepest issues that users need solved are ones that
| Rust was designed to solve at the language and compiler level.
|
| 1. System stability and memory efficiency, zero or fewer
| crashes due to memory-safety or thread-safety problems.
|
| 2. Security and assurance via the elimination of entire classes
| of attack vectors like buffer overflows.
|
| 3. Highly performant, responsive applications that are a joy to
| use.
|
| Solving problems at the compiler level eliminates the reliance
| on fallible programmers to do so. People also tend to discount
| maintaining those solutions over years of dev team turnover,
| startup failures, etc. Building those solutions, capabilities,
| and constraints into the language itself makes maintenance over
| the entire product lifecycle more consistent.
|
| It's like buying a Toyota, you know from the brand alone that
| you're getting a certain baseline level of reliability,
| maintainability, durability, and longevity. Rust is like the
| Toyota of programming languages - it can produce many different
| types of cars/programs, but they're all guaranteed to come with
| a baseline level of assurance, and to eliminate common classes
| of problems that degrade the end-user experience.
|
| It may not make sense for other languages to be prominently
| featured as a selling point, but Rust is an exception.
| nine_k wrote:
| For a relatively new language that still is not everywhere it's
| a good example of its viability for such a project. Also, it
| either testifies the richness of the ecosystem, or promises
| that it will get enriched in the process, because the
| development appears to be open-source.
| megumax wrote:
| From what I know, system76 didn't shill cosmos as a rust DE,
| the only reference to Rust being done in some reddit comment.
| Most PopOS users don't know what Rust is, so it wouldn't make
| sense to talk about Cosmos as a Rust project.
|
| Now, 90-95% of users use GNOME or KDE, having some competition
| from a `new` GTK4 DE can't be bad, so I would like to see
| Cosmos gain attention, and maybe be ported to other distros.
| pxc wrote:
| System76 is just using Rust for COSMIC because the existing
| engineering talent here already use and like it for other
| things they work on at the company, like their device
| firmwares. It's a good common/familiar language for the teams
| they have. I don't think they're expecting Rust to do any magic
| for them.
| lallysingh wrote:
| System76 isnt making it about the implementation panguage:
| https://blog.system76.com/post/648371526931038208/cosmic-to-...
|
| A Ctrl-F rust showed no results.
|
| This post's author just likes Rust.
| magicjosh wrote:
| Ah just to clarify, the blog post you referenced is from this
| past June. COSMIC based on Rust is a new development that
| System76 has not blogged about yet besides mentioning it in a
| Reddit post.
|
| As a System76 fan, I too am curious to see what the point is.
| I have no idea what Rust is nor do I care.
| mdoms wrote:
| "Written in Rust" is simply not a good enough reason to adopt
| something like this. It's visually identical and functionally
| inferior... so what's the big deal?
| trulyme wrote:
| Nice, exactly what Linux needs the most - another desktop
| environment!
|
| Sarcasm aside, it does _look_ pretty good. But between
| indistinguishable window title bars and yet another settings app
| (wanna bet it will miss some config so users wil still need to
| run one of the others?), I think I 'll pass. As far as I'm
| concerned this problem was solved ages ago, so I simply don't
| understand why the designers keep mucking with it. Maybe I'm just
| getting old. :-/
| azinman2 wrote:
| Gotta keep up with the latest Apple designs! :)
| smoldesu wrote:
| I for one would be satisfied to miss the Big-Sur-ification
| boat...
| capableweb wrote:
| > Nice, exactly what Linux needs the most - another desktop
| environment!
|
| One could argue that because no one desktop environment has
| taken over the Linux mindshare, we haven't invented _the one_
| yet, so people keep trying. It 's not until something takes
| over the mindshare (like systemd did), we can all unity and
| start improving upon the same base.
| wmf wrote:
| I'm pretty sure there will never be The One due to political
| and psychological factors. Many people use Linux specifically
| because there's isn't One way to do things.
| 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
| I'd argue that the battle over desktop environment supremacy
| leaves desktop Linux less compelling overall. There is so
| much choice that it's paralyzing and new users constantly
| second guess themselves. You have thousands of developers
| doing their own thing rather than working together to make
| mainstream choices like Gnome more viable.
| michaelmrose wrote:
| Gnome doesn't want thousands of developers implementing
| their own visions for their projects and others don't want
| to donate their time to implementing gnomes vision.
|
| The proper thing for them all to do is all implement their
| own visions and people to use or work on what they please.
|
| Nobody asks why Tesla, Ford, and Toyota are wasting
| everyone's resources by being different company. Nobody
| suggests having different car manufacturers is paralyzing.
| Nobody opines that once the perfect car is invented we can
| just deprecate the rest because those would all be silly
| positions.
|
| The car market and computer uis are an evolving
| multidimensional entities whose evolving product lines are
| and have been dependant upon many parties pulling in
| different directions.
|
| It's like looking at only a duck and a pond and asking why
| the universe couldn't have just made a duck because it
| would be an ideal choice for that place and time. Of course
| it couldn't possibly work like that because arriving at
| that exact solution without intermediate steps would be
| impossible and besides the duck is no good in the desert or
| tundra.
|
| Also gnome is so flawed in so many ways from leaking memory
| due to unfixable mismatch between js and compiled code, to
| nonsensical handling of multiple desktops, to add-ons that
| both rely on monkey patching your desktop due to lack of
| addon api and can with a single crash kill your whole
| session, to hostility towards themeing, to ugly header
| bars, to hostility towards support for non gnome desktops.
|
| It is a worst in class solution.
| [deleted]
| anthk wrote:
| A lot of Windows users loathed Windows 8 and installed classic
| shell like crazy.
|
| And I'm sure zillions of people would pay in order to have a 3D
| like shell a la Windows 98, or Windows XP/Net theme for a more
| modern look.
| keltor wrote:
| It "looks" good because so far all it is, is recreating GNOME
| running in PopOS while using the Rust GTK4 bindings.
| lawl wrote:
| I honestly don't quite understand what System76s intentions with
| COSMIC are. To me it feels like a regression from the previous
| gnome and i've kicked their plugins to get a regular gnome back.
|
| It just... Doesn't do anything my custom openbox or i3 setups in
| the past didn't do (imo better). Nor is it better at being gnome
| than gnome.
|
| And now that i'm getting old and gotten used to stock gnome it
| just seems like it makes me change my workflow again for no good
| reason.
| mstipetic wrote:
| Do you really not understand that most people don't want to use
| custom i3 configs?
| lawl wrote:
| I do, as i said, i'm getting old and use stock gnome these
| days, because i don't want to maintain custom configs for
| everything anymore.
| mkdirp wrote:
| Right. And so Pop!_OS gives you a decent tiling window
| manager, with sane defaults, without having to spend hours
| on customising your configuration. What's more, the tiling
| they provide is an optional feature. You can enable and
| disable it at any time without messing with you config for
| hours.
| lawl wrote:
| If its good or not is a matter of taste in the end, but
| not the entire point. It also hijacked Super+L which was
| screen lock (like on windows).
|
| And then cosmic was even worse by changing the behavior
| of the super key completely.
|
| Both of these things broke my workflow for things i never
| asked for.
|
| I like pop and their polish compared to ubuntu [0]. I
| really hate it when software breaks my workflow.
|
| [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28904171
| Shared404 wrote:
| This is my thing.
|
| I have machines where I run Alpine with sway customized. I
| have had machines where I've run without a DE at all. I've
| customized things that weren't meant to be, and not
| customized things that were.
|
| But if I want something where I can walk up to any somewhat
| modern machine (currently typing this on an old Alienware
| running pop), and install an OS that gives me an i3-like
| environment with no extra work? Pop is _fantastic_. There are
| things that I would do differently. But they 're minor and
| being able to just go is worth a _lot_.
| pkulak wrote:
| I know that open source and Linux in general don't need/want
| another DE, but selfishly... I really want System76 to succeed.
| They give me the same kind of feeling I had when Apple was
| kicking butt in the early 2000s. And I think that for them to
| become a general-audience company, they need to really own more
| of their software. They have some great ideas, and they've
| already plugin'ed Gnome to within and inch of it's life; it's
| time to move out on their own. And it's not like a new DE means
| apps won't work. DEs are just the window dressing and computer
| management.
|
| What I really wonder about is Wayland support. Is this going to
| be a brand-new DE that's X only? That would be a real shame. I
| know System76 has stuck doggedly to X because they sell so many
| NVidia cards, but NVidia supports GBM now.
| pxc wrote:
| > I know that open source and Linux in general don't need/want
| another DE
|
| Unpopular opinion, but more DEs is fine and good, especially if
| they will have teams that are either (a) large or (b) well-
| funded. Plasma and GNOME are very good, and Unity was actually
| great to use in its heyday.
|
| Imo what we don't really need more of are the conservative,
| under-resourced 'classic look and feel' DEs like most of the
| minor players in the space. Those tend to end up incomplete and
| ill-performing, and there are already lots of them. I hope the
| existing ones thrive, but I don't think having more f them
| would do much good.
|
| But anything as good as the big two, but with a different
| focus? Let's see it!
| rjzzleep wrote:
| If this DE has low resource usage and working freedesktop
| screensaver protocol implementation and idleness
| implementation but doesn't force me on their toolbar and
| window manage I'll take it immediately.
|
| Lxqt is the closest to allowing that because it wraps
| standard tools when possible, but this wrapping of standard
| tools also means that those tools don't really work.
|
| For example, I use slock for screenlocking, but there is
| actually no working third party freedesktop screensaver
| implementation that doesn't tie you into their DE.
|
| Xsecurelock seems to have hacks for it, but it can't even do
| something as simple as just showing an image without breaking
| with the wrong window compositor.
| [deleted]
| btdmaster wrote:
| It seems to use wayland: https://github.com/pop-os/cosmic-
| comp/blob/main/src/main.rs#....
| aidenn0 wrote:
| The shell is implemented in GTK4, and the compositor depends on
| smithay[1], so I assume they plan for Wayland support.
|
| 1: https://github.com/pop-os/cosmic-
| comp/blob/main/Cargo.toml#L...
| pkulak wrote:
| Interesting, thanks. Guess they went that way because of
| Rust, but it would have been super cool to have another
| wlroots compositor on the block.
|
| EDIT: Just found this, which explains a bit: http://way-
| cooler.org/blog/2019/04/29/rewriting-way-cooler-i...
| stjohnswarts wrote:
| You never know what's possible in the future but I imagine
| right now they're working on the core features so
| supporting every compositor around is down the road a bit.
| mariusmg wrote:
| > I really want System76 to succeed
|
| Succeed at what ? Re-implementing Gnome in Rust ?
| nine_k wrote:
| Hopefully not.
|
| Not re-implementing Gnome. Not re-implementing macOS which
| Gnome strives to imitate. OTOH I see the value of that: many
| people got used to macOS, and making things similar, and the
| cognitive load of switching low, makes business sense. Same
| as with Windows in early 2000s.
| yobert wrote:
| I think you can assume they meant succeed at creating
| computers people love to use and selling them.
| [deleted]
| pkulak wrote:
| Selling lots of Linux-based hardware that they design in-
| house.
|
| > Re-implementing Gnome in Rust
|
| That seems a bit disingenuous. It's all still GTK.
| dathinab wrote:
| gnome =! gtk
|
| sure they are a bit more related then KDE and QT, still but
| the same at all
| stjohnswarts wrote:
| We all know that. I assure you. Gnome uses GTK and
| evidently Cosmic 2.0 will use GTK
| pantulis wrote:
| At making 2022 the year of Linux in the Desktop!
| wmf wrote:
| _DEs are just the window dressing and computer management._
|
| That's how you end up in a situation where the contents of the
| window clash with the dressing because more and more apps can't
| be themed. If they want a consistent look they'll need to fork
| or write a whole new set of apps.
| nine_k wrote:
| The irony is that the reason why authors claim when they
| remove theming is to have a consistent look.
|
| For some apps I don't care too much, because I run them in
| full screen anyway, and their specific look is adjusted to
| their function: IDEs, DAWs, even graphic editors. But if they
| do support DE-wide themes, I do appreciate that!
| wmf wrote:
| Yeah, GNOME should just admit that it's an OS and stop
| pretending to be a framework or DE or whatever.
| SkyMarshal wrote:
| They sort of do. https://os.gnome.org/
| flenserboy wrote:
| Better to adopt Budgie and move it over to Rust if that's really
| where they want to go.
| anthk wrote:
| Solus OS' BOFH got tired of Gnome and he will switch the entire
| stack in to Enlightenment. And inb4 "E17 and such have Gaudy
| theming", last E has a flatish theme, so something like Arc for
| E would be really easy to implement.
|
| https://www.enlightenment.org/
| cyberpunk wrote:
| Is it even remotely stable yet?
|
| Iirc it was all hanging off of a single process sometime back
| so if a single dock item died basically it hosed your entire
| desktop. I managed to get it started once or twice, as I was
| a huge fan of e16 but it just seemed... unusable really.
| jonpalmisc wrote:
| At the risk of sounding too negative/critical, I honestly just
| don't like the design language here.
|
| Everything seems overly rounded, and more importantly, the
| screenshots even show very weird/inconsistent alignment and
| padding in the UI.
|
| Why is it that so many Linux GUIs -- between apps and desktop
| environments -- suffer from a lack of attention to detail?
|
| Once again, it's early, I'm sure they are aware of some of these
| issues, but I can't say I'm excited for this based on what I just
| saw.
| Klonoar wrote:
| It's early enough that I'm giving the benefit of the doubt on
| the spacing issues. They're obvious enough that I would hope
| System76 (who seem to care about design in most respects) are
| aware and will get it eventually.
| pxc wrote:
| > Why is it that so many Linux GUIs -- between apps and desktop
| environments -- suffer from a lack of attention to detail?
|
| The software you're looking at hasn't been released yet-- at
| all. Not even an alpha. There are literally no tags on the
| libcosmic git repo.
|
| You mention that it's early, but I'm not sure you appreciate
| _how_ early.
| laputan_machine wrote:
| It's open source. You sound like 1) you're knowledgable about
| what makes "good UX" and 2) you care enough to post about it.
|
| Instead of complaining, why not contribute to making it better?
| [deleted]
| coolso wrote:
| It's this pervasive mentality that continues to hold the open
| source community back, even still in 2022.
| kelnos wrote:
| How is that the case? Open source software only thrives
| when there is a community around it that is dedicated to
| making it better. Many people seem to think that only
| programmers can do this, but there's always a need for
| designers and documentation writers to step in and help as
| well. Admittedly, some programmers have trouble accepting
| advice and criticism from non-programmers contributors, but
| I do believe this has been getting better over time.
|
| What is the alternative, if not for people who notice
| problems and care about them to step in and contribute?
| astrange wrote:
| Rounded is good so it doesn't poke you in the eyes. There's
| some strange choices of ligatures in their UI font, though. Or
| just poor kerning.
|
| https://blog.edfloreshz.dev/images/articles/linux/system76/r...
|
| I'm not sure why this desktop UI looks like an iPad either.
| eric__cartman wrote:
| I think it's because designing good user interfaces is hard and
| very time consuming (at least for me it certainly is). And
| generally Linux users are more contempt to put up with
| inconsistencies and annoyances because many probably don't care
| and leave most things in a default state, or customize stuff to
| their heart's desire.
|
| I'm not saying this is exclusive to Linux distros, I sometimes
| find the UI in Windows 10 to be confusing, having to jump
| between the settings and control panel application to find some
| niche option. It's apparent that parts of that UI were made 20
| years ago while others are made with modern toolkits.
|
| I hope that System 76, being more consumer oriented than other
| companies that mainly develop for Linux, listens to feedback
| from a wide range of users and manages to develop an ecosystem
| to be the "MacOS of Linux workstations" in the sense that
| everything is polished and working out of the box and everyone
| from regular home users to advanced professionals and
| enthusiasts can pick up and use without major inconveniences.
| oblio wrote:
| > I'm not saying this is exclusive to Linux distros, I
| sometimes find the UI in Windows 10 to be confusing, having
| to jump between the settings and control panel application to
| find some niche option. It's apparent that parts of that UI
| were made 20 years ago while others are made with modern
| toolkits.
|
| They're rewriting all of that but it's a pain in the neck to
| do it.
|
| My guess is that they'll finish in 10 years :-))
|
| If you want compatibility worries, check their Windows
| Terminal blog.
|
| Or Raymond Chen's blog for some real compatibility howlers.
| dotancohen wrote:
| > Why is it that so many Linux GUIs -- between apps and desktop
| environments -- suffer from a lack of attention to detail?
|
| Because nobody who notices files issues. Open source projects
| do not have the UI teams of Apple and MS. Please, find the
| bugtracker and file the issues that you've noticed. Thank you!
| criddell wrote:
| It's still very early and there's no way that the people
| making this can't see the alignment and spacing problems. I
| would assume they will get to it when they can.
|
| The other stuff (like rounding everything) is a deliberate
| choice.
| akdor1154 wrote:
| Fortunately it's not a gnome project, so there's a good chance
| you will be able to just change the theme to something you
| prefer.
| rhn_mk1 wrote:
| What is the point of the effort though? It doesn't seem to me
| that the user is gaining a whole lot from an almost exact rewrite
| of some apps that already existed.
|
| They don't need to be fast to use, so there's nothing to gain
| from better speed. They weren't ugly, so a slightly different
| styling is not a win. They weren't crashing all the time, so
| reliability is not it.
|
| They don't try to redesign some core desktop experience from the
| looks of it either.
|
| So... why?
| shmerl wrote:
| GTK4? It seems like Rust based UI toolkit is still missing.
|
| I like the idea of using Rust for the DE, but personally I'd
| stick with KDE.
| adamnemecek wrote:
| Yeah and they can get like infinite mindshare with it too.
| shmerl wrote:
| Right, but it's probably a huge project they don't want to
| maintain.
|
| They could limit the scope though. I.e. focus on Linux only
| from the start at least. But it's probably still a lot of
| work.
| adamnemecek wrote:
| ...and a desktop environment isn't? Building your own GUI
| toolkit isn't that bad esp. if you have a team. Cross-
| platform isn't that hard, windowing is like the only thing
| that comes to mind where there are some differences in
| behavior.
|
| Rendering would be done presumably using some cross-
| platform GPU API like Vulkan or wgpu.
| shmerl wrote:
| I agree, I think building GUI toolkit first is a better
| idea than building a new DE before you have a better
| foundation. Not sure what's their rush with DE then. They
| can improve KDE instead, until Rust based GUI toolkit is
| ready.
|
| Cross platform here is not easy, if you want that toolkit
| not to be ugly and have some kind of native look and
| feel.
| billconan wrote:
| ya, I wanted to ask the same question. there doesn't seem to be
| a mature gui lib for rust yet. what is this desktop based on?
| adamnemecek wrote:
| GTK4.
| DCKing wrote:
| This blog post focuses on some superficialities of how their DE's
| apps will look slightly different. That's understandable for
| first impressions.
|
| I do hope these superficialities don't have all of System76's
| focus, as they're a dime a dozen in Linux DEs. Even the category
| of "we kind of look like Gnome, but with more familiar workflows"
| is oversaturated amongst Linux desktops (Budgie, Xfce, Cinnamon,
| MATE, Elementary/Pantheon, even "Gnome+extensions" are all in
| this category to various degrees). I suppose one distinguishing
| factor that Cosmic has is a strong Wayland focus, which is still
| missing from nearly all Gtk based alternatives.
|
| System76 with Pop_OS! has an opportunity to tackle topics head on
| like "we can make fractional scaling work somewhat decently
| across all apps" (IIUC currently requires shipping a forked
| XWayland, unfortunately), "we can make trackpads the best they
| can be" (requires shipping some forked libinput related things
| IIUC) or "we can make font rendering best we can make it". The
| actual _desktop environment_ stuff I 'd be interested in.
|
| A desktop environment needs more vision than shipping the same
| old Linux desktop problems with some other apps. I really hope
| System76 can make an effort there. They're trying to make their
| paycheck depend more on their own Linux desktop's success, and
| that I can only encourage.
| benatkin wrote:
| I can see 2022 being another almost Year Of Linux on the Desktop.
| I wonder what dirty tricks big companies will pull, like
| Microsoft did when netbooks became a threat.
|
| (Searching around, I see a lot of people don't get it, they say
| that Year of Linux on the Desktop has happened. It hasn't yet and
| some think it never will.)
| thanatos519 wrote:
| It happened for me in 1994, and I think it's a case of
| "gradually, then all at once": Once Microsoft and Apple stop
| maintaining their software, people who still have computers and
| electricity will move to Linux.
| benatkin wrote:
| I hope so. The thing is that we have Chromebooks, which is
| the Linux Kernel on the Desktop (to me, doesn't satisfy the
| goal of Linux on the Desktop). So we need something so
| compelling that Google will also not be able to keep up. Or
| we need Chrome and/or Android to morph into something open
| enough to be considered Linux on the Desktop.
| botdan wrote:
| Modern Chromebook with their "Linux containers" are really,
| really close to being a wonderful developer experience with
| the same level of user accessibility, support, and
| refinement of any of the other "major" operating systems
| out there. I'm surprised Google hasn't capitalized on it
| further.
| 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
| They don't have to sabotage Linux, Linux developers and the
| community does that all by itself (unwittingly).
| benatkin wrote:
| I have your response covered under "some think it never will"
| :)
|
| I agree a lot of mistakes have been made but I'm not sure
| Linux developers/community will continue to make big enough
| mistakes to stop its momentum every time it gains some.
| Shadonototra wrote:
| > COSMIC desktop using GTK 4
|
| GTK.. what a waste of an opportunity
|
| I wish Canonical didn't gave up with Unity 8.. Ubuntu and unity
| was the reason i was using linux as my main desktop OS, when they
| announced they'll use Gnome 3, i reinstalled windows.. when
| windows 10 got announced i moved to macOS, i now back to linux
| with Mint (i love cinnamon desktop btw)
|
| Gnome and GTK are a curse, they drive people away from linux
| desktop
| 0xbadcafebee wrote:
| I could not possibly care less what language you write the UI in.
| Write it in Brainfuck, I don't care. Just make the UX not suck
| and provide the functionality I need.
| coolso wrote:
| At least when Brainfuck's fans proselytize and mention the
| language as much as they possibly can, they're being ironic and
| have a sense of humor about it. Humility and humor seems to be
| expressly forbidden in the Rust CoC, right next to not wearing
| a pronoun on your name tag.
| tibbydudeza wrote:
| So what is the win for System76 here ???.
|
| They just make boutique computers computing against the like of
| Dell/Lenovo when it comes to Linux friendly computers.
|
| How many sales do they do per year to justify this direction
| yepthatsreality wrote:
| The win is that they're no longer required to work around Gnome
| as Gnome's vision is to minify the DE. This makes it difficult
| to develop a custom flavor if your base keeps removing features
| or making strongly opinionated UI decisions.
| Underphil wrote:
| "...we're all curious as to how this desktop will look like..."
|
| Is this an Americanism? My brain can't read this properly.
| noahtallen wrote:
| It's a combination of "curious what this desktop will look
| like" and "curious as to how this desktop will look." (Which
| could be simplified to "curious how this desktop will look.")
|
| I'm not sure if it's an Americanism as much as poor phrasing :)
| innocentoldguy wrote:
| No. It is a grammar error. I think they got that sentence mixed
| up with the one after it, which happens during editing
| sometimes.
| Karsteski wrote:
| Reads perfectly fine to me. Probably depends on the
| dialect(s) of English you're familiar with
| 71a54xd wrote:
| This is awesome! Very cool to see developer-first _real_ modern
| desktop tooling being put together.
| ismayilzadan wrote:
| Why do you think this is a developer first desktop?
| JaggedJax wrote:
| System76 very much advertises Pop as an OS for engineers and
| developers: https://pop.system76.com/
| ThinkBeat wrote:
| What exactly is a Linux "desktop environment"?
|
| Does it contain a window manager or is that fully separate? Is it
| the "explorer", shell, menu, dock, what not? (But didn't that at
| least in part reside in a window manager)?
|
| Is it libraries that applications that are to be executed under
| the DE?
|
| If it is using the GNOME libraries (GTK???) ? Will GNOME
| applications be native?
| pxc wrote:
| > Does [a desktop environment] contain a window manager or is
| that fully separate?
|
| yes, it does. You can sometimes swap out the default WM for a
| DE, if you want
|
| > Is it the "explorer", shell, menu, dock, what not?
|
| yes
|
| > (But didn't that at least in part reside in a window
| manager)?
|
| not really. That's an implementation detail that just varies
| between different DEs and WMs more than across time. Most DEs
| don't use the window manager to draw the desktop background,
| but some do
|
| > Is it libraries [and] applications that are to be executed
| under the DE?
|
| yeah, at least if they're integrated with the DE or come with
| it on a given distro
|
| > If it is using the GNOME libraries (GTK???) ? Will GNOME
| applications be native?
|
| that's up to System76, basically. I think they do want most
| GNOME apps to be more or less native under their DE
| Narishma wrote:
| It's all of those things.
| [deleted]
| monsieurgaufre wrote:
| While I admire the effort and all, it just looks like a case of
| NIH to me.
| adamnemecek wrote:
| System76 should build a Rust GUI framework. I can't think of many
| other companies that are better positioned than them.
| mixedCase wrote:
| Doesn't seem like there'd be any good reason to do it. Gtk4 has
| great low and high level bindings in the form of gtk-rs and
| relm.
| smoldesu wrote:
| Writing GTK4 apps sucks, at least in Rust. They removed so
| many idiomatic ways to build apps, and all you're left with
| is a shitty component system that forces you to write
| incomprehensible UI layout code instead of leaving it to
| JSON/XML languages that are much better suited to the
| process. In any case, gtk-rs's bindings after 9.0.0 are
| hardly usable, and require me to re-write entire apps just to
| get them to launch in the new and "improved" GTK4 wrapper,
| now with incredibly blurry text, compositor issues and broken
| stylesheets... sigh.
|
| I, for one, would _love_ to see someone fork GTK3 for desktop
| purposes. GTK4 's development has almost entirely been
| predicated by the GNOME team (despite how hard they deny it),
| and additions like libadwaita has made GTK unusable for many.
| After Pop_OS! was publically harassed by the GNOME team, I
| kinda expected them to take that project up. I can settle for
| a desktop fork all the same though.
| mixedCase wrote:
| Sounds like you want high level bindings, instead of gtk-
| rs. Have you tried relm4?
|
| > and additions like libadwaita has made GTK unusable for
| many
|
| Could you expand on that?
| adamnemecek wrote:
| There's a very good reason. GTK never looks very good. Also
| it uses paradigms that are just not idiomatic in Rust.
| anthropodie wrote:
| After unity, I tried couple of DEs but then forced myself to stay
| with Gnome because I wanted to stop endless tinkering and get
| work done. I tried it for half a year and then switched to Sway,
| a tiling window manager.
|
| Sway has little to no footprint. I have configured my system the
| way I like it. Now I do minor tweaks sometimes but nothing major.
| My entire configuration is in a single file! I am not going back
| to DEs ever.
| filmor wrote:
| Sway is a window manager, not a DE. The right thing to compare
| it to is Mutter. I also use sway, but quite a few of my
| applications are from Gnome (like evince, nautilus, gnome-
| calendar, fractal...).
| distantsounds wrote:
| You don't need a tiling window manager to get everything in a
| single config file. Fluxbox has historically been great at
| this, while still being extremely light on resources.
| anthk wrote:
| Fluxbox + rox + roxlib (for Rox plugins/addons) make the
| ultimate DE. Everything else can be made into systray applets
| such as blueman or nm-applet.
|
| As for theming, Zukitre for Fluxbox + any modern theme for
| icons. Done. Fancy, modern yet featureful as back in the day.
| SahAssar wrote:
| Could you share your config? I also use sway but to me it seems
| like behind the statement "I have configured my system the way
| I like it" there is quite a lot of configuration. Also when
| saying "My entire configuration is in a single file", do you
| also include things that are normally configured in a DE
| settings app, like wifi, disk auto mounting, bluetooth
| connections, sound settings/volumes, display configurations,
| etc?
|
| I like (and use everyday) sway and I like using WM's as a part
| of puzzling together a system. I just don't think you are
| comparing apples to apples here.
| a-dub wrote:
| i always disliked gnome 3 because of the user interface (it
| seemed to be an amalgamation of all the bad things from os x or
| even macos), not because of the underlying language it's coded
| in.
| Andrew_nenakhov wrote:
| Canonical was really onto something very good with Unity, but
| Gnome3 is a UX disaster. Every single app from Nautilus to
| Gedit became harder to use. And it has lots of empty bars
| wasting space everywhere.
| smoldesu wrote:
| I know a lot of people who despise GNOME 3 on the whole, but
| I'm willing to defend it for what it is. If you've ever used a
| touchscreen Linux device, it becomes a whole lot easier to
| appreciate what they did with the toolkit. GTK apps just...
| work on a touchscreen. No modifications or fancy-pants
| libraries required. They also work really well on desktop too,
| with nice plump interactive elements that make sense for the
| category of devices that it's targeting. It looks equally as
| spiffy at 200% scaling as it does at 100%, and it's snappy as
| all hell.
|
| I don't speak for everyone, but GTK3 is the unofficial "native"
| toolkit for Linux. QT isn't far behind (I've been using Plasma
| since GNOME 40 and it's a blast), but GTK3 just feels... right.
| Also licensing and custom stylesheets yadda yadda yadda.
| supernintendo wrote:
| I use GNOME + Wayland on desktop, with a few tweaks and
| extensions, and I'm totally willing to defend it. It's a
| lovely computing environment that just feels at home to me
| and I think it has a tasteful balance of modern and
| traditional UI patterns.
| schmorptron wrote:
| I'm loving gnome as well, especially since 40,but still
| can't help but imagine what unity would look like now had
| it continued development at canonical. One of my main
| gripes with gnome is the huge amount of wasted space in the
| top bar that would just be perfect for a global menu like
| unity had.
| smoldesu wrote:
| That's fine, I'm not going to take that away from you since
| I've heard great things about Wayland with the proper
| hardware for it. As for GNOME, I don't think it's
| _terrible_ , but it does definitely feel like a regression
| to me when compared with GNOME 3.3x or GNOME Classic. It's
| perfectly fine to like it (computer UIs are still
| opinionated after all), but I feel like their leadership is
| heading in an undesirable direction for a huge chunk of
| GNOME loyalists. GNOME 3.38 felt like home to me for a long
| time, but 40 never clicked. Plus, their "my way or the
| highway" mentality doesn't work well when combined with
| their lack of contributors and overall supremacist,
| absolutist viewpoint on the desktop as a whole.
|
| I do still like certain aspects of GNOME, but I worry for
| their future under the current leadership.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-01-13 23:00 UTC)