1. The two biggest linux server service companies are betting their future billion dollars business on it. That is good enough for me. Im sure though that some basement powerusers are too leet to deal with this so the go 100% hipster and tell another story on phoronix. Well I guess Im gonna stick with the proven business succes here, sorry if that means Im less leet than you :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Sidicas
2. Yes this is effectly a lockin on Linux. But what is wrong with that? Sure it hits a snag when debian is trying be distroing everything but the kitchensink.
3. Systemds fast boot is more than a gimmick. It will cause less down time in unforseen events and during upgrades. Thats fine but nothing special. Having fast boot is the prime feature for infotainment systems in eg. cars. When you start the car, you expect feedback within 3 seconds. That is easy on systemd. Go look at the documentation and tools. It is a pleasure.
Gnome works quite fine without SystemD. I use Gnome 3.4 on gentoo and there is no trace of systemd installed at all.
BTW. From my point of view Gnome3 is faster than Gnome2 -- faster startup and faster to work with, as much more is controllable via keyboard. Hell, even application startup only requires a keypress less: <Windows> + the first few letters of the app + return. On gnome2 it was <Alt>+<F2> + first few letters + return after some (short) time period, until the list of apps was generated.
Great, just in time with gnome's decision to finally remove "fallback"...
This decision is going to be challenged again soon. Gnome3 has nothing whatsoever to do with gnome2, as desktop environments are concerned; from an usage point of view, it is the same as if the distro suddenly decided to go with KDE, CDE or whatever.
At least Mint tried to mitigate the mess with many forks to restore the "classic" experience on top of gnome3.
Also the graphic requirements of gnome3 are a recipe for disaster, especially for a distro which emphasizes conservative "stable" choices.
if you are too inapt to read posts then you shouldn't write posts!
i hate the taskbar. it is the second most useless thing i ever found on DEs, right after the windows damn start menu.Quote:
How can you say that doing all that is an improvement over the concept of the taskbar?
How can you not see that it's slower? It requires more movement of the mouse. How can doing more for the same thing be an improvement? Why didn't they just leave the taskbar alone.
most of the time it just wastes space! for the moments i need to switch i either press super and then click the program or i driectly use alt tab. i take the extra milisecond for this over a permanent taskbar to get rid of this space wasting and ugly thing!
for me it is one of the BIGGEST improvements ever. FOR ME!
it is your right to not share my opinion on this. but because YOU cannot understand how OTHERS may like it it is at least ignorant to call the WHOLE gnome shell concept shit ONLY BECAUSE OF THIS LITTLE annnoyance for you.
go use something else than. nearly any other de has this taskbar. i do not like it so i wellcome the first DE that has a not perfect but a valid new approach to DE concepts.Quote:
They wanted change for the sake of change. To seem that they are improving the UI by having revolutionary ideas or something. The taskbar is a good concept that doesn't need change. Leave it there!