The 2012 GNOME User Survey Begins, Take It Now

[Fenrin]

overall I think Gnome 3 is a big improvement to Gnome 2, but some things I don't really like:

• pulseaudio dependency
• it seems extension maintainer have a bit much hassle to support recent GTK 3 version; maybe to much changes between GTK 3.x versions
• in Gnome 3.6 apps like Gnote and Liferea lost its icon in the state bar; now it is not even possible to close Liferea properly without taskmanager or kill command
• Nautilus should order by type again or if not it should at least remember the last order choice

[Kivada]

How about Gnome-shell exposing the arrogance within the very whining users thinking they are the center universe?
Those reactions only mean Gnome Shell decision turned out be right after all.

Yes, because tossing out a working product and wholesale changing the UI paradigm is an absolutely brilliant idea? If this was a paid software package there would be rioting in the streets if it was anyone other then Microsoft doing so.

And yes, the designers aren't some godlike artisan savants that sculpt masterpieces 5 times a day, they are normal people, people that make make mistakes like going "live" with an experimental UI in OSs they knew where going to have to package it by default or switch to KDE and QT, which isn't an option either since that is also a bad move seeing how buggy and resource hungry it is.

Go take a look at every MS OS from Windows 95 through 7, the same UI is there either as the default, available in the display options or just under the surface if you disable the "Themes" service. Mac OS? No major changes from System 6 through OS 9.2.2, going into OS X slight changes but no massive departure from the paradigm.

So again, why should this kind of complete change be acceptable in OSS software? And don't say use "Fallback Mode," they are already going to axe it as we knew they would.

And before you ask again, yes, I've already tried and didn't like the way XFCE or LXDE worked. Mate is now the only good option but may not have the manpower to keep the thing going.

[Kivada]

I disagree. The Gnome guys have barely any manpower as it is. They should just stick with their current plan.

As is evident by just some the posters here, there are people that like Gnome 3 (including me). For the people that want a more traditional desktop environment that can be tweaked to their personal tastes, there's plenty of others that can do that. The Gnome 3 guys should just cater to the niche they have and the rest can just pick an environment that best suites their needs and tastes.

Well my problem here is that there are too many people in the OSS crowd that think that the " OSS Developer Is Always Right" no matter how asinine their decisions may be just by virtue of them being an OSS developer, these are the same people that will go after proprietary software companies for their design decisions at the drop of a hat though.

[Vax456]

Well my problem here is that there are too many people in the OSS crowd that think that the " OSS Developer Is Always Right" no matter how asinine their decisions may be just by virtue of them being an OSS developer, these are the same people that will go after proprietary software companies for their design decisions at the drop of a hat though.

On the one hand, yes, the dev's do have a self-centered attitude about their design. On the other hand, at least that attitude will keep things consistent with Gnome's design.

While we're on that note, let's take a look at what we're doing here. http://xkcd.com/198/ Different piece of software, same lesson.

The other lesson we really need to learn: http://prog21.dadgum.com/128.html

So what if the dev's are hard-headed assholes? Don't drop to their level. Voice your complaints, but don't throw a hissyfit. If they don't listen, then switch to something that offers what you want.

[Kivada]

So what if the dev's are hard-headed assholes? Don't drop to their level. Voice your complaints, but don't throw a hissyfit. If they don't listen, then switch to something that offers what you want.

Well I'm of the mind of "if it ain't broke don't fix it". This is a rarity in software, I know, but at least Mozilla seems to get that with Thunderbird. As far as they are concerned Thunderbird is a finished product, there are no more advancements to be made, all that remains are bug fixes, security updates and platform compatibility updates.

Sure, thats the boring stuff to do, but it also means that the software has come of age and the wheel need not be reinvented yet again.

[Delgarde]

Yes, because tossing out a working product and wholesale changing the UI paradigm is an absolutely brilliant idea? If this was a paid software package there would be rioting in the streets if it was anyone other then Microsoft doing so.

Just how different do you think Shell is? Because calling it a change of UI paradigm is hardly warranted - true, it's not the old UI, but it's still a fairly traditional desktop. Still the same old windows and pointers, a panel at the top where you can do stuff, notifications that appear at the bottom of the screen. What's changed? The application launcher, the workspace pager... that's about it, really.

[BO$$]

I disagree. The Gnome guys have barely any manpower as it is. They should just stick with their current plan.

As is evident by just some the posters here, there are people that like Gnome 3 (including me). For the people that want a more traditional desktop environment that can be tweaked to their personal tastes, there's plenty of others that can do that. The Gnome 3 guys should just cater to the niche they have and the rest can just pick an environment that best suites their needs and tastes.

OK so you basically say that Gnome 2 had the market and they just decided with the new Gnome 3 to just revert to some niche? Is that something a normal person would do? Say fuck you to everyone except a small minority? Alienate a lot of its users?

[Kivada]

Just how different do you think Shell is? Because calling it a change of UI paradigm is hardly warranted - true, it's not the old UI, but it's still a fairly traditional desktop. Still the same old windows and pointers, a panel at the top where you can do stuff, notifications that appear at the bottom of the screen. What's changed? The application launcher, the workspace pager... that's about it, really.

Its different enough that it should have been spun off into a separate, optional project. I don't like it for the same reasons I don't like LXDE and XFCE.

[Vax456]

OK so you basically say that Gnome 2 had the market and they just decided with the new Gnome 3 to just revert to some niche? Is that something a normal person would do? Say fuck you to everyone except a small minority? Alienate a lot of its users?

It's not a mult-billion dollar corporation. It's a community that's funded by Red Hat and other companies. It doesn't make direct profits off its user base unless you count donations (does Gnome take donations?). The Gnome developers don't owe us anything.

Yes, Gnome 2 had the market. But there's several other desktop environments that have basically the same thing as Gnome 2. If the Gnome developers were determined to push forward with something, why not try something different? What's the real harm? What are we really losing besides the Gnome branding? It's not like the applications that were tied into Gnome are completely exclusive to Gnome, and even if some were, it's not like there are several other programs that do the same thing.

[disi]

Add shutdown / restart / suspend options <<-- this comes in 3.6 but we lose the logout option

Add support for tiled window management <<-- this is something I miss

Other than that, Gnome 3 is great