GNOME Is Losing Relevance On The Linux Desktop
Phoronix: GNOME Is Losing Relevance On The Linux Desktop
By now many of you have likely seen the blog post by GNOME's Benjamin Otte where he argues that GNOME is staring into the abyss, but if you have not, it's worth reading...
So, not even considering KDE? I'd love to know your reasoning. I'm genuinely curious, since I have been using KDE at work for some time (on and off). I'd like to know what a Gnome user thinks about KDE.
Here's what a Gnome user who used KDE (4.2 - 4.6) for about 1 year thinks about KDE: It crashes a lot and is unpolished. For the longest time there were tiny visual bugs in apps, notifications, plasma, etc. that kept piling up over time, making the desktop experience look like Windows 98. Also I dislike that I need to spend 5 minutes configuring every new KDE program that I install (I know I'm exaggerating, but you get my point). My first impression coming from Gnome was that it was awesome and gave me all the power to configure what I wanted. Soon I realized that this meant spending lots of time configuring stuff, because of all this "power". It has great programs, but most of them are full of features that I never needed to use once. I also think that Gnome is exaggerating with the "simplification" business, but still most Gnome apps are easier to look at due to the lack of visual clutter, something that to me is important. I don't know how Calligra is doing, but KOffice was unusable due to the lack of text editing and spreadsheet features (ironic!). Things I liked about KDE: Dolphin, Digikam, KLauncher (I think it was the name... it's the "start menu") because at that time it was the better desktop integrated tool for quickly launching applications using the keyboard.
Originally Posted by bug77
Agreed 100%. And having tried almost any linux desktop environment / window manager out there, I still find Gnome 3 a much better choice than the others (unless you're using an old pc, in which case I'd use xfce and/or openbox). Gnome 3 is fast and intuitive, works fine on my netbook (unlike KDE) and I can almost avoid using the mouse (unlike Gnome 2).
Originally Posted by devius
KDE doesn't work fine on your netbook? I run KDE on a laptop with a single core 1.8GHZ 32bit AMD Sempron processor with 512MB DDR and a 4200rpm 70GB IDE hard drive. I tried XFCE and LXDE on it, but the dramatic loss of features wasn't worth saving 50MB of memory.
Originally Posted by halo9en
How can Gnome be intuitive? KDE uses the standard desktop metaphor that's been in use for almost 20 years. There's nothing more intuitive than that.
I belive that now is the time to using E17. It's easy and not is memory pacman.
It's not the standard desktop metaphor, it's the Microsoft Windows95 desktop metaphor. That's like saying right-hand traffic is the standard in driving. Or that the Nintendo DS is the standard mobile console.
Originally Posted by alcalde
What I mean is that it may feel more easy to get used to when coming from a Windows-centric world, but it's not the only desktop paradigm that exists. Anyway, that "standard" will die a little with Win8 so the world is clearly moving forward. Nothing ever stays the same forever.
KDE 4.6 was released end of January 2011, while the latest, stable version of KDE was released in 6 June 2012. So, I think it's a little unfair to compare 4.6 to the latest stable version. A lot can happen in almost a year and a half. Comparatively, that's like saying the Unity in Ubuntu 12.10 sucks, when the last time you tried it was in 11.04.
Originally Posted by devius
I'm not saying that KDE was right in the way it approached the 4.0 release, or in how long it took to sort out all the problem. Truthfully, I think they had never dreamed it would take as long as it did to work out all the issues. But, given the countless man-hours that they've poured into it, I think it at least deserves to be judged by it's latest release. I'm certainly not going to judge Gnome based on the 3.0 release. (Which also occurred a year and few months ago.)
I agree that gnome 3 is not perfekt would be funny if a such early version would be feature-complete. So yes maybe some mechanism to as example spread out 6 consoles over one window would be nice, like the share screen between 2 windows left and right with more windows, that would be nice but that was not there in gnome 2 too or did I miss that feature?
But going back to your artikel and the blog artikel you linked to:
In the Blog some points are just stupid:
1. "gnome has no goals", I disagree to that, gnome 3 had the goal or at least it did randomly do that, make the desktop more usable from the keyboard and it works better with tablets and netbooks, so what else it looks better, and it has a new application design that tool after tool gets migrated, than it works better with cloud/web2.0 sites/services, thats not bad. Shure there is not the one big idea they run after for 5 years... I think they try to find the stuff that sucked most in the last release or and try to make it better, its often very easy to find ideas what should be better, as example they make now better youtube integration and:
that are great ideas also the gnome-boxes tool is great idea etc... they do nice stuff...
also they had for developers the idea that 1. as many as possible developers should be able to to customize or write apps for gnome. to use here js and css is a extremely great idea, because thats what most developers can do... the many developers that makes this extentions so short after release profes that it works.
with that said we come to the other points:
2. "Gnome is a Redhat Projekt" like said unity is a ubuntu projekt so what... but like I said the extentions are made by others so its not true, too.
3. "GNOME is understaffed." they try (successful) to get more developers on board like I said with that great design it works.
Then there is other stuff that can be done without having big ideas, porting epiphany to the newest netkit version thats coming soon (3.6?)
4. "core developers are leaving GNOME development." like its said no bad feelings about that, such stuff happens from time to time, biologicaly having kids or getting old or stuff like that, or someone wants not to work on the same stuff the hole live...
on the other hand the kde developer was frustrated so here is a bigger problem.
To Michael, it seems you did not use gnome-shell for working with it over a longer time, so try it, its like git, at the beginning much people hated it, then after a while it changed, its just a big conzept-switch and people hate when they have to learn new ways of doning stuff... each time I see this not even lined up fixed 4 desktops of unity I get a lough flash, how retarded that is, having them under each over makes it so easy to blindly switch trhough them, and having only so many I need (have open programms) makes it also easier to not have some empty ones I search through.
And btw, if you want to organise through the windows and dont want to use the overlay, its easy, you can go with strg + alt + up/down through the windows, and adding shift to it you take with you the active window. So if you have a desktop with 5 open windows, just select with alt+tab one then strg+shift+alt + down till you have it on a free desktop. then go back without shit to the first and repeat this 3 times and you have all seperated in seperated screens, if the windows are not fullscreen, super + up and its maximised... thats just nice especialy on a laptop what most users use, you dont want to use the shitty trackpad to do such stuff with it when you can help it. Even with Trackpad and fast settings, I prever to not have to move around when I dont need to.
So you have to learn this 5 keyboard shortcuts, to get more efficient with it than any other UI but if you do that you are more efficient. And here we see its the same like it was with git, there was the complains its more complex svn is simpler, yes but if you do learn this stuff (and this shortcuts are way more easy than gits commands ^^) you get a more efficient faster user experience. Thats worth it.
The last point in the blog:
5. "GNOME is losing market- and mindshare."
so here is the question is gnome the problem that leads to Ubuntu switching away from gnome, or is switching away from gnome from ubuntu a big part that leads to "GNOME Is Losing Relevance On The Linux Desktop".
I think gnome did switch away from gnome not because any of the listed points, so yes gnome looses users when the biggest linux distribution dont uses it anymore (not even in a seperate gubuntu or something) I find it more interesting, that even its hard to get a good gnome-shell experince in ubuntu or for beginners to find/install it, there are nearly as much comments in the softwarecenter over gnome-shell and has a better rating in their own shop than unity has:
unity 3 from 5 stars 415 ratings
gnome-shell 4 from 5 stars 238 ratings
kde-standard 5 from 5 stars 3 ratings
maybe that are not 100% 1:1 the same amounts of users that are use that, but if you would think that for a moment, even 33% of the ubuntu users are such unsatisfied with unity that they switch install gnome-shell, thats much especialy if you think that ubuntu is the only distribution that ships unity with it (ppas or something in other distros I do not count)...
BTW to "gnome has no goals" they did the same with gnome 2, gnome 2 had no real goals except making a good desktop they made that happen very soon, but then evolved it slowly, there were not very often big new features, they just filling the edges out version to version, and make all there and there a bit better. Thats exactly what made gnome 2 to the desktop-war winner at that time. (and maybe that ubuntu used it). So why should they not do the same after one big cutting some braids off and making some big architectural and other changes, they should go back to evolvemode and not revolutionize all 6 months all desktop conzepts...
Last edited by blackiwid; 07-28-2012 at 01:18 PM.
That's a totally pointless comparison.
Originally Posted by blackiwid