Fedora Proposal To Use Cinnamon Desktop By Default

[Akka]

There's a change - honest to god numbers. You can always argue how such things are gathered, but still.

If you install the package pkgstat it send your package stat in some interval. If you use <pkgstat -s> you get a print about what would be sent from your computer.

and as it partly topic, according to the stat cinnamon has a installation base at 2.3%. Not completely fair comparison thought as cinnamon only is on AUR

[kickback999]

If you don't like it, why spill hate on it. Its not like you are stuck with it. You can install any other desktop.

Well if everyone took that sort of logic, no one would complain and Gnome (which I feel strongly about due to having used and loved it for many years) would be much less likely to have any changes reverted.

I kindly replied to kickback999 and told him that it is possible to launch an application in Gnome in this way.

That isn't my only problem with the interface. Its not even the worst by far.

[zxy_thf]

Well, cars have had the same (many) decades-old UI (steering wheel, brakes, gearbox etc) but i am pretty sure most people don't mind. In other words: Just because an idea is old, doesn't mean it is less valuable, AKA change just for the sake of change is bad...

They are different.
Cars have over 100 years of history, and have changed much before their "modern" look.
For Desktop UIs, every major Windows version has visible and invisible improvements.

I think people can enjoy a 15 years old car but cannot bear the incontinent UI of Windows 98, although it is also 15 years old.

[Delgarde]

Gnome shell isn't designed for tablets, just because it has a black taskbar on top.

See, that's the thing that puzzles me with that particular piece of Shell criticism - that it's a tablet UI, which is absurd. It's an entirely traditional desktop UI, and the only possible basis for that criticism is, as you say, that the task bar is black like the one in iOS or Android. As someone who actually uses both Shell and Android, there is literally no other point of similarity that I can see.

[GreatEmerald]

What is more telling is that other major distributions have moved away from it. Ubuntu and Mint, for example, and non-GNOME distros like Mageia and OpenSUSE are also gaining. Fedora is the only major distro where you get GS by default.

openSUSE doesn't actually have a default setting. It has a screen with both KDE and GNOME presented on equal terms, and it's down to the user to select which one to install:
http://doc.opensuse.org/documentatio...2_sys_type.png

According to the discussions, GNOME and KDE users were pretty much in equal halves last time I checked. There are no usage statistics in OBS just yet, but it should be integrated soon enough, so it will be possible to get some harder numbers.

I think that this is something Fedora could use as well. No default option. Have users select what they like.

[Delgarde]

Yes it was. If you go back and read the initial announcements tablets and touch were the rationale for its development. On top of that, look at the similarities to Android:

1) Dock. Check.
2) App Drawer and six little squares for the app drawer icon. Check. Check.
3) No minimizing. Check.
4) "Notifications" area. Check.
5) Optimized for single window. Check.
6) Open existing instance rather than new instance of apps. Check.
7) etc. etc. etc.

It shares more UI elements from iOS and Android then it does from the classic desktop, from which it only kept the application panel. They did this on purpose so don't try to rewrite history.

Um, no? You can minimize applications in Shell, even if the button is hidden by default - just right-click the title bar, and minimize. Nor is Shell optimised for single window (though certain Gnome applications are) - for the most part it behaves identically to G2 or KDE. And half the other features you list are common to almost every desktop - the "dock" is something I first recall encountering in CDE years ago, the "app draw" is pretty much the same thing as the Windows start button, and the "notifications area" is just a variation on the standard system tray.

Further, it's a hugely keyboard-optimised interface, much more so than it's predecessor. Yes, parts of it are probably quite usable with a touch screen, but not really on a keyboard-less device like a tablet. If aimed at touch devices at all, it's at the same laptop hardware that's becoming common post-Windows8 - i.e with touch support supplementing the conventional desktop.

[TemplarGR]

I suppose the default status is important to catch newbies. But besides that I don't think it matter so much outsides of ubuntu and mint(I get the impression that their user bases culture is different from the rest of the linux distros in that they are "loyal" to the default software in higher degree)

In Arch Linux its look like gnome shell is installed in around 24.5 % of the computer that has the "pkgstats" package installed. kdebase-plasma is installed in 26.5 % of the computers. xfdesktop has 24.5 %. Openbox 24.5 %, i3-wm 6.5%
Besides the low number for i3 I think the number is as expected. Kde is biggest but it almost even with gnome and xfc.
https://www.archlinux.de/?page=PackageStatistics

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.

So, just because you have something installed doesn't mean you actually use it or prefer it. I tend to install many packages since i want to be able to have every function available the time i want it, try new things (funny how shell fanbois accuse me of refusing to try) etc...

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?

[TemplarGR]

They are different.
Cars have over 100 years of history, and have changed much before their "modern" look.
For Desktop UIs, every major Windows version has visible and invisible improvements.

I think people can enjoy a 15 years old car but cannot bear the incontinent UI of Windows 98, although it is also 15 years old.

People really enjoyed the UI of Windows 98 back in the day. It once holded the vast majority of OS market share for a time... If they really couldn't bare it, they wouldn't use it.

The reason people can't bare Windows 98 UI TODAY, is simply because it has less eye candy and it was designed with lower resolutions in mind. Its design principles are the same with Windows 7: Start menu, system tray, open windows showing in the middle etc. When you are using Windows 7, 99% of your actions are the same you would be using if you had Windows 98, just with less eye candy and no grouping for open windows.

[Bucic]

It's absolutely hilarious how little fanboys get their panties in the bunch that some people out there do not like their "official" and "only correct" desktop. If you prefer something else, you are wrong and evil There are no two ways to skin a cat, only the GNOME developers' way, or the electric chair. Just use it if you like it and let other people use what they prefer, FFS.

What's hilarious is:
- GS-haters prefer to use GS and whine instead of switch to Xfce, LXDE or the, praised by glass-plastic-90s-fetishists, KDE. It's easy on Linux to switch to another desktop environment, even to have them installed on one system!
- if they don't use GS, then what's left? They bash it and don't use it?

I can't decide on my own which one is more pathetic. Please, help.

[TemplarGR]

What's hilarious is:
- GS-haters prefer to use GS and whine instead of switch to Xfce, LXDE or the, praised by glass-plastic-90s-fetishists, KDE. It's easy on Linux to switch to another desktop environment, even to have them installed on one system!
- if they don't use GS, then what's left? They bash it and don't use it?

I can't decide on my own which one is more pathetic. Please, help.

This is a forum. A forum is a place where people gather to say their opinion about a matter. Sometimes they like a thing, sometimes they don't. As long as they provide arguments in the discussion, both are welcome.

A forum isn't a place where everything needs to be written only by people who like a particular subject, and avoid criticism at all costs. If that is what you need, create a GnomeShell-is-the-best-thing-since-sliced-bread blog and gather all similar minded people and share your passion for this UI and rejoice!

If you don't understand what is a forum, do not participate in one... I am tired of all these politically-correct "if you don't like it don't use it but don't say your opinion" BS...