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

Linux Mint Developer Forks Gnome 3

tech.slashdot.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 53 posts

Re: Linux Mint Developer Forks Gnome 3

#3

Post by thristian »

I remember reading a computer-magazine columnist back in the mid-90s talking about how Windows 95's interface was too revolutionary and different, and that we should expect Microsoft to have a parallel "Windows Classic" release with the same superior technical underpinnings as Windows 95, but with the traditional Windows interface that their millions of users were familiar with.

Obviously that didn't happen, and I doubt that this "GNOME 3 with a GNOME 2 interface" will get very far either. GNOME 3 is pretty great for most people's workflow, and if you're particularly attached to some feature that's not present, you could try the GNOME 3 2D fallback mode (which looks pretty much just like GNOME 2), or XFCE, or LXDE. If those aren't conservative enough for you, there's still the various *box window managers, WindowMaker, pekwm, and dozens of others.

Re: Linux Mint Developer Forks Gnome 3

#7

Post by egil »

thristian wrote: post #3

I remember reading a computer-magazine columnist back in the mid-90s talking about how Windows 95's interface was too revolutionary and different, and that we should expect Microsoft to have a parallel "Windows Classic" release with the same superior technical underpinnings as Windows 95, but with the traditional Windows interface that their millions of users were familiar with. Obviously that didn't happen, and I do…

While not a seperate product, you could run the old program manager and file manager from Windows 3.x by running 'progman' and 'winfile'.

Re: Linux Mint Developer Forks Gnome 3

#8

Post by darklajid »

Tomek_ wrote: post #6

So we have Gnome3, Gnome2, KDE, Xfce, LXDE, Unity, this + gazillions more I don't even remember about. Anyone still believes Linux has any chance on a desktop market?

Gnome2 is dead.

Sure, it's still installed all over the place (just like Windows 98 and XP might be), but it is by all means a dead project.

Unity (and this fork, as I understand it) are based on Gnome (3!) and just replace the shell. So your list becomes

- Gnome (Gnome-Shell, Unity, this fork)

- KDE

- (list of minorities)

For me - while being a Gnome guy and preferring the gnome-shell option from that list - the choice doesn't really matter. It's as moot as arguments during the times of Windows XP were, about whether you should enable the classic mode or use the Luna theme.

Post reply on HN