Gnome Linux – A Complete Disaster?
medium.com
Gnome Linux – A Complete Disaster?
1–10 of 18 posts
Re: Gnome Linux – A Complete Disaster?
#2> “GNOME’s […] excuse for not doing something is not it’s too complicated to do, but it would confuse users. The whole we know best thing is a disease.” — Linus Torvalds
Yep. Sadly a more and more pervasive idea among software developers and especially interface designers though.
Recently I've been testing the waters of Linux Desktop more than usual because I can foresee a day in the near future where Microsoft has fucked up Windows to the point that it is the lesser piece-of-shit. So far, I'm finding Fedora Silverblue to be pretty good at giving me the kind of system I want, but it of course uses GNOME. It feels like it desperately wants to be a running on a phone and I have to install extensions just to make it bearable. And don't get me started on how useless GNOME Software is.
I tried Kinoite first, of course, because KDE doesn't despise its own userbase, but sadly it had too many problems. I suppose I could just install KDE on top of Silverblue though.
Edit: Apparently there was a miscommunication. I am not looking for DE or distro suggestions.
Re: Gnome Linux – A Complete Disaster?
#3> “GNOME’s […] excuse for not doing something is not it’s too complicated to do, but it would confuse users. The whole we know best thing is a disease.” — Linus Torvalds Yep. Sadly a more and more pervasive idea among software developers and especially interface designers though. Recently I've been testing the waters of Linux Desktop more than usual because I can foresee a day in the near future where Microsoft has f…
I don't know if it's possible, but if you want a windows experience you might want to try cinnamon. If you're feeling lucky and don't mind a bit of customization, XFCE can do it too.
Re: Gnome Linux – A Complete Disaster?
#4> “GNOME’s […] excuse for not doing something is not it’s too complicated to do, but it would confuse users. The whole we know best thing is a disease.” — Linus Torvalds Yep. Sadly a more and more pervasive idea among software developers and especially interface designers though. Recently I've been testing the waters of Linux Desktop more than usual because I can foresee a day in the near future where Microsoft has f…
I don't know if it's possible, but if you want a windows experience you might want to try cinnamon. If you're feeling lucky and don't mind a bit of customization, XFCE can do it too.
Seconding this. Cinnamon and XFCE are both enjoyable and have a lot of similarities to the classic Windows desktop UI.
Re: Gnome Linux – A Complete Disaster?
#5> “GNOME’s […] excuse for not doing something is not it’s too complicated to do, but it would confuse users. The whole we know best thing is a disease.” — Linus Torvalds Yep. Sadly a more and more pervasive idea among software developers and especially interface designers though. Recently I've been testing the waters of Linux Desktop more than usual because I can foresee a day in the near future where Microsoft has f…
I don't know if it's possible, but if you want a windows experience you might want to try cinnamon. If you're feeling lucky and don't mind a bit of customization, XFCE can do it too.
[deleted]
Re: Gnome Linux – A Complete Disaster?
#6I know this will be an unpopular idea but I like the direction gnome is following. I think it is becoming a solid and reliable OS, it has much fewer bugs than KDE, it's getting faster update after update and I like libadwaita to have consistent windows styles. It was frustrating to have ten different windows style, in particular on a 4k monitor. Gnome has a solid core system and we can download or develop extensions if something other is missing.
What's wrong with it?
Re: Gnome Linux – A Complete Disaster?
#7Sorry, but this article is bad. What exactly are they comparing GNOME to? It sounds like they want GNOME to be like Windows, such that "lack of desktop icons" and "there are no minimize and maximize buttons" is an automatic con and not, say, a simple reality of how it works; it is a desktop environment that doesn't do desktop icons. Instead, your equivalent to the "desktop" is the dash, your files are in the Files app, the background is just what you see behind your windows, and there is a reason the window menu replaces "minimize" with "hide". It's fine if it doesn't work for you or you think it's the wrong direction, but if you're going to pretend computers are a solved problem and everything should be frozen in time or it's wrong (a "disaster", at that!), I am going to find it very difficult to care about your opinion.
> For instance, requiring a full browser engine (i.e. WebkitGTK) to use a desktop environment is anything but minimalist.
That right there is absurd. Name one complete desktop application platform from the last ten years that doesn't come with an equivalent to WebKitWebView. If GNOME isn't hosting this, somebody else has to. If what you really want is a way to organize all of your xterm windows, that's fine, go and do that, but don't tell people they're wrong for existing in this century.
> In many file managers F4 key launches the terminal, but not in Files
I know this will be very upsetting for people who use "many file managers" and switch between Linux desktop environments like they change clothes, but for the vast majority of users, that type of concern is completely irrelevant. For what it's worth, you can always right click on a blank space, or click the current folder in the breadcrumbs bar, and choose "Open in Terminal".
> Just to build WebkitGTK can take one hour and more than 16 GB of RAM, while Xfce on the same machine can be fully built in 5 minutes, requiring less than 500 MB of RAM.
One hour? That's luxury. Have you tried to build Chromium lately? And I'm sure XFCE can be built in five minutes if you just grab a prebuilt libgtk, but you should probably be asking, where did that library come from?
> [Scary screenshot] Building GNOME Display Manager can be a nightmare
https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-build-meta
You're welcome?
Anyway, choose a less inflammatory title next time.
Re: Gnome Linux – A Complete Disaster?
#8Such a weird article. Gnome is an awesome desktop, and I can only assume the article author is used to Windows.
No desktop icons? Yeah we don't use that anymore, it's not 1990. We type one or two chars in the program name and press enter. If you want icons, you can have it through extensions, but it's a very old paradigm and you really should stop clicking icons to start programs. There is no need.
Gnome has a single button for Do Not Disturb, and now you have no notifications from any programs bothering you while working. How cool is that? Being able to actually focus.
I could go on but I don't actually care enough to do so. Someone being wrong on the Internet is OK. :)
Re: Gnome Linux – A Complete Disaster?
#9> It is common to hear in the Linux community that GNOME is currently the best you can get if you want the so-called modern desktop environment.
That's debatable, to put it politely...
Re: Gnome Linux – A Complete Disaster?
#10> “GNOME’s […] excuse for not doing something is not it’s too complicated to do, but it would confuse users. The whole we know best thing is a disease.” — Linus Torvalds Yep. Sadly a more and more pervasive idea among software developers and especially interface designers though. Recently I've been testing the waters of Linux Desktop more than usual because I can foresee a day in the near future where Microsoft has f…
I don't know if it's possible, but if you want a windows experience you might want to try cinnamon. If you're feeling lucky and don't mind a bit of customization, XFCE can do it too.
XFCE is pure awesomeness.