Page 11 of 26 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 257

Thread: Fedora Proposal To Use Cinnamon Desktop By Default

  1. #101
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Serbia
    Posts
    44

    Default

    OK I haven't read the entire thread so maybe someone else mentioned this but, if Gnome looses it's support from major distributions out there (Ubuntu, Mint and for the sake of the argument let's say Fedora) how do you think that will reflect on Gnome development and what would become of "DE's" that are based on Gnome such as Cinnamon and Unity. THIS is why I wasn't too keen on distro's having their own DE's/WM. And right now, if someone asked me what DE/Distro should I use for deployment in enterprise enviroment I wouldn't know what to say, Xfce probably on Ubuntu or Fedora or Debian with Gnome 2.

    Xfce dev's will profit from all of this, their code base is relatively small and easy to maintain, they don't rush the features in and you are more or less certain that what you are using today won't change in the near future that much. And they are light on the hardware requirements wich is very important in the enterprise segment.

    I, for one, don't like GS or G3 for that matter, but nevertheless I think that Fedora shouldn't change anything and continue to ship G3 as a default desktop enviroment and to show strong support for it's respins.

  2. #102
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    344

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TemplarGR View Post
    Arch Linux stats don't mean much. I have installed Gnome AND KDE but currently i am using Cinnamon which , correct me if i am wrong, isn't counted in those stats as it is in AUR at the moment.

    I am using Cinnamon although i prefer KDE's UI. The reason for not using it is that for some reason Kwin stalls when there is serious HD activity and sometimes completely freezes. In other WM i don't face this issue.
    If you look in the last category it's its counted there. Cinnamon has 2.3% installation base in there stats.

  3. #103
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    199

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thalaric View Post
    You have to switch to overview to switch applications, like in Android. Indeed, many of the responses here have claimed the right method for using gnome shell is not to minimize but just open the app again.
    What's the use case here? If I have multiple apps open (which I usually do) I either use Alt-tab or Super->Overview->click. Not much different from what I do in Windows or GNOME2.
    If there is an app that I need to have opened, but I don't want to be shown, I put it on another workspace. Easier to find than using minimize, IMHO.

    Mobile/touch computing was a core design principle from the beginning of the project, and it shows in the result. This is good but their mistake was trying to unify the experience instead of taking a two prong approach. Now the interface isn't optimized for either mobile or a workstation.
    Whether something is optimized or not is probably hard to measure. I feel that G3 is just as optimized as G2 though. I do things differently, but not slower or worse.

  4. #104
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    199

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BO$$ View Post
    It doesn't even have a goddamn taskbar. Here is a reason. That I've stated hundreds of times. And don't give me yet again the alt-tab or going to that corner to change between applications. A taskbar is good and necessary. They removed it -> they are evil and try to fuck my workflow -> fuck them I'm not using it -> complain on forums hoping if we reach critical mass the idiots will listen to the users.
    I don't miss the taskbar at all. I find clicking Super and then a big window works just as well (or better?) than trying to click a small area at the bottom of the screen. Especially when I am using a touchpad.
    Also, I kind of like freeing up vertical space
    Not sure why everyone is so obsessed with the hot corner either. Use the keyboard dude :P

  5. #105
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,926

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kigurai View Post
    I see very little actual arguments on why GNOME3 is bad. Only a lot of emotional/subjective opinions.
    How many actualy arguments do you see on why it is good?

    Since you were replying to me earlier, I explicitly welcome choice -- as long as the big players cooperate on common desktop infrastructure so things interoperate. However, when people actually argue that there is only one way to use a computer and running anything else is wrong (like the guy I was replying to earlier), then these people have lost all sense of reality.

    Once a desktop stops doing what people need it to do, people will not spend years changing their habits, people will flock to software which lets them do what they want. KDE learned and has listened to people's complaints after early KDE 4 versions removed functionality, and it changed for the better as a result. Now it seems like GNOME will have to learn the same lesson.

  6. #106
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Rural Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    1,019

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TemplarGR View Post
    The Gnome Shell faces legitimate criticism but as is usual with the Gnome mentality, it is their way or the highway. The funny part is that GNOME's mentality was tolerated for so much time because it was the one Ubuntu used, and because Gnome 2 worked both for casual and productive uses. Now that there are other alternatives and GNOME Shell hinders the productive user, people are fleeing in large numbers. Soon the Shell will be used only by its developers and its sworn fanboys, if this trend continues. There is hope though, since in 3.8 the Classic mode will return. What have the fanboys to say about THAT? Is it the wrong move? Why GNOME devs waste precious resources to go back in time? Will "progress" be destroyed? What?
    Do you realize that your post here is internally inconsistent? First you berate Gnome for not taking "legitimate criticism" and for believing it is "their way or the highway" and then you mention GNOME Classic as if it proves your point. Well, sorry to shatter your allusion, but that was created because they heard the criticism and because they took other users opinions on board. This whole argument is bloody redundant. Please, if you have something useful to add, actually contribute feedback to the people developing the classic mode you guys have been wanting for years instead of continuing to perpetuate this childish and vindictive victimization cult you have going on. Is it really so hard to put your ego aside and actually try and build something for once? And you people have the gall of criticize the developers for supposedly having egos...

  7. #107
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    199

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    How many actualy arguments do you see on why it is good?
    There is a ton of blog posts with cool GNOME features. But I think it is common courtesy to specify why you think something is bad if you are trash-talking it.

    Since you were replying to me earlier, I explicitly welcome choice -- as long as the big players cooperate on common desktop infrastructure so things interoperate. However, when people actually argue that there is only one way to use a computer and running anything else is wrong (like the guy I was replying to earlier), then these people have lost all sense of reality.
    I agree.

    Once a desktop stops doing what people need it to do, people will not spend years changing their habits, people will flock to software which lets them do what they want. KDE learned and has listened to people's complaints after early KDE 4 versions removed functionality, and it changed for the better as a result. Now it seems like GNOME will have to learn the same lesson.
    I think it is good that GNOME dares to go in its own direction. Because I like that direction. There are already a ton of more or less similar desktops, so I fail to see why GNOME should "fall in line" here. Since choice seem to be so important for a lot of people, GNOME going in a different direction should be a good thing, right?

  8. #108
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,926

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kigurai View Post
    I think it is good that GNOME dares to go in its own direction. Because I like that direction. There are already a ton of more or less similar desktops, so I fail to see why GNOME should "fall in line" here. Since choice seem to be so important for a lot of people, GNOME going in a different direction should be a good thing, right?
    Yeah, that's awesome. That's what Enlightenment, *box and the GNUStep crowd have been doing for a long time, and they have their loyal userbase. I have no problem with this.

    However, this will impact the "default" status of GNOME as the dominant desktop. And it might make it an exotic alternative like E17 or ratpoison, instead of being the face of the Linux desktop. http://blogs.gnome.org/otte/2012/07/...nto-the-abyss/

    As a KDE user, the only thing I'm interested is that everything interoperates, so I am not punished for my choice.

  9. #109
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    199

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    Yeah, that's awesome. That's what Enlightenment, *box and the GNUStep crowd have been doing for a long time, and they have their loyal userbase. I have no problem with this.

    However, this will impact the "default" status of GNOME as the dominant desktop. And it might make it an exotic alternative like E17 or ratpoison, instead of being the face of the Linux desktop. http://blogs.gnome.org/otte/2012/07/...nto-the-abyss/

    As a KDE user, the only thing I'm interested is that everything interoperates, so I am not punished for my choice.
    So, because GNOME is some kind of de facto default they can never change? Sounds like a fun project.

  10. #110
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,926

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kigurai View Post
    So, because GNOME is some kind of de facto default they can never change? Sounds like a fun project.
    No, I don't think that they should not change, they should. But it has always been their stated goal to be THE desktop for everyone (after killing KDE). They did a lot of politics to get into that position. This would be a very large departure from this plan.

    In any case, the days of the desktop dichotomy are over. Now we have 4-5 good contenders in KDE, GNOME, Xfce, Unity and Cinnamon. And, of course the "WM+launcher+apps" crowd which will always be a significant factor on the Linux desktop.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •