Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Gnome 40 – The anti-desktop desktop

dedoimedo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 84 posts

Re: Gnome 40 – The anti-desktop desktop

#2

Post by walrus01 »

I don't get why "Linux on desktop" people feel the need to continually reinvent the concept of what a desktop GUI is, just to be novel or different. This goes back to things like KDE3/KDE4 and Canonical's Unity.

What is wrong with a more traditionally designed desktop metaphor such as how it's implemented in XFCE4 or LXDE?

As a baseline for comparison I've used very nearly every linux or BSD based GUI desktop (on top of xfree86 or xorg) that has existed in the past 20 years, since the earliest days of KDE2 and Gnome. And I'm presently using a fairly normal XFCE4 setup.

Re: Gnome 40 – The anti-desktop desktop

#3

Post by admax88q »

walrus01 wrote: post #2

I don't get why "Linux on desktop" people feel the need to continually reinvent the concept of what a desktop GUI is, just to be novel or different. This goes back to things like KDE3/KDE4 and Canonical's Unity. What is wrong with a more traditionally designed desktop metaphor such as how it's implemented in XFCE4 or LXDE? As a baseline for comparison I've used very nearly every linux or BSD based GUI desktop (on top…

I don't get why classic desktop people feel the need to continually complain the GNOME does not implement the classic desktop paradigm.

We get it, you want the classic desktop paradigm. Nothing wrong with that, but that ship has sailed years ago with regards to GNOME.

And why shouldn't people implementing GNOME for free have fun and experiment. Nobody wants to implement windows 95 for fun.

Re: Gnome 40 – The anti-desktop desktop

#4

Post by walrus01 »

admax88q wrote: post #3
walrus01 wrote: post #2

I don't get why "Linux on desktop" people feel the need to continually reinvent the concept of what a desktop GUI is, just to be novel or different. This goes back to things like KDE3/KDE4 and Canonical's Unity. What is wrong with a more traditionally designed desktop metaphor such as how it's implemented in XFCE4 or LXDE? As a baseline for comparison I've used very nearly every linux or BSD based GUI desktop (on top…

I don't get why classic desktop people feel the need to continually complain the GNOME does not implement the classic desktop paradigm. We get it, you want the classic desktop paradigm. Nothing wrong with that, but that ship has sailed years ago with regards to GNOME. And why shouldn't people implementing GNOME for free have fun and experiment. Nobody wants to implement windows 95 for fun.

I'm not even so much complaining about GNOME, which these days has actually reverted to something much closer to a classical desktop metaphor that is equally suitable for technical users and noobs...

But every other group of people with a new GUI idea that thinks "Nope, we're gonna reinvent the wheel and make a new weird GUI just because". Linux on desktop is already what, 1% to a max of 2% of desktop market share world wide? And then you have people building weird stuff on top of xorg or wayland that is used by one percent of that one percent just for the sake of being different.

If it's intended and promoted for technically sophisticated users to play around with? Sure, great idea I suppose, the more the merrier. But so many of these concepts are pushed as a "better, easier to use, more user friendly for noobs" GUI, when in fact all it does is split the market and confuse the end user. In particular I'm thinking of the various efforts that have been made to clone the MacOS user interface, including the Dock.

I should note that my opinion above also applies to Windows 8/8.1, which was clearly a misstep, as evidenced by Microsoft returning to a much more classic desktop environment design for Windows 10. At least they acknowledged what went wrong and backed away from it.

Sort of like a GUI version of this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsFzc0wAtFs

Re: Gnome 40 – The anti-desktop desktop

#8

Post by grawprog »

walrus01 wrote: post #2

I don't get why "Linux on desktop" people feel the need to continually reinvent the concept of what a desktop GUI is, just to be novel or different. This goes back to things like KDE3/KDE4 and Canonical's Unity. What is wrong with a more traditionally designed desktop metaphor such as how it's implemented in XFCE4 or LXDE? As a baseline for comparison I've used very nearly every linux or BSD based GUI desktop (on top…

Not sure why you're throwing KDE into this. I've been using it for almost a decade now. It's stayed fairly consistent, offers the familiar desktop, panel and launcher style interface, is fully customizable in just about every way. Doesn't hide anything from you, doesn't make things obtuse or opaque. Never tried to force some mobile interface on you. It's pretty much the opposite of GNOME in every way.

Re: Gnome 40 – The anti-desktop desktop

#9

Post by diffeomorphism »

throwaway4400 wrote: post #7

Is the three finger swipe a "gesture"? I'm guessing a decent amount of older hardware does not recognise a three finger swipe. So workspace browsing would be broken ootb for these users.

Nothing would be "broken". If you have a multitouch trackpad you can use A, if you have a mouse you can use B, if you have just a keyboard you can use C, if you have just a touchscreen you can use D,...

Same confusion years ago with the login screen. No, you don't have to swype. You can or you can press any key, just like on any PC ever.

Re: Gnome 40 – The anti-desktop desktop

#10

Post by walrus01 »

grawprog wrote: post #8
walrus01 wrote: post #2

I don't get why "Linux on desktop" people feel the need to continually reinvent the concept of what a desktop GUI is, just to be novel or different. This goes back to things like KDE3/KDE4 and Canonical's Unity. What is wrong with a more traditionally designed desktop metaphor such as how it's implemented in XFCE4 or LXDE? As a baseline for comparison I've used very nearly every linux or BSD based GUI desktop (on top…

Not sure why you're throwing KDE into this. I've been using it for almost a decade now. It's stayed fairly consistent, offers the familiar desktop, panel and launcher style interface, is fully customizable in just about every way. Doesn't hide anything from you, doesn't make things obtuse or opaque. Never tried to force some mobile interface on you. It's pretty much the opposite of GNOME in every way.

Did you see or use KDE4 when it was new? KDE4 was a radical departure from the earlier design, which looked like a mimicry of Windows Vista for "reasons".
Post reply on HN