It’s funny because GNOME was the first OSS X11 desktop environment to get actual usability testing from corporate developers (Sun Microsystems).
I’m not sure if they still have a user interface design guideline document, though. They probably burned it when GNOME 3 development started. Haven’t checked. I’ve mostly used Xfce since then (and very recently KDE).
Gnome is not really touch-centric, it’s more keyboard-crentric. Sure, the activity overview is great for touch. It’s even greater for the keyboard though. And I don’t like using the mouse a lot anyway
There’s a gnome for mobile branch that has what you’d expect from a good touch experience. Pretty sure the plan is to bring some of that work over to the main desktop branch at some point.
Old gnome is nostalgic to me, because my first venture into Linux was Fedora Core 4. I was still using Win98 at the time, and gnome 2.10 felt so modern in comparison, with rounded corners and soft gradients.
Coming back to Linux after having not touched it for a very, very long time I tried gnome again and I just do not like it at all. It’s weird looking. Maybe too modern for me, i don’t know.
If you miss GNOME 2 try MATE. It is a continuation of GNOME 2.
I’ll check that out, thanks! It does look nice. I have two PCs with Mint with Cinnamon, I’m pretty happy with. I have one more PC to switch over to Linux, I’ll probably try MATE on that.
It’s a fine DE… But boy making appindicator/KStatus an un-officially-supported extension is dumb
deleted by creator
It’s a pity that the dont improve touch experience. Especially floating touch keyboard situation - there is none (working well).
My only complain in (default PopOs/Gnome’s?) Dolphin file explorer there is no “space” to right click in the “current” directory… Otherwise IMHO it’s no worse than Windows!
That’s a pretty low bar!
They seem to be at war with the minimize and maximize buttons.
Last time I’ve used minimize and maximize buttons was 20 years ago. And yet I think accessibility is more important than whatever the fuck designers that create clean dumb UIs think is important.
You can just toggle them back on
Except for this one Debian machine I have to maintain. They will still disappear on ever restart. They will still be turned on in tweaks and the only way to get them to appear is to switch them from right to left. Luckily I don’t have to use it much.
Really weird decision they make
Tbf, you can maximize by double-clicking the titlebar or dragging the window to the top so the button is kind of redundant. You can also (un)minimize by clicking on the taskbar so the minimize button would too be kind of redundant if GNOME hadn’t gotten rid of the fucking task bar.
So the solution is I change my decades long habits. Sounds kinda like microsoft.
lol somebody woke up on the wrong side of bed. I’m just telling you the reasoning as to why it’s done because it’s a fun fact. I don’t care what you use. Chill.
Don’t push your emotional state onto me.
Did you just reply “no u”?
Its pretty standard thing to say to someone who thinks projects their emotional state onto someone else. Nothing about my statement suggested I ‘woke up on the wrong side of the bed’ It does however suggest you can’t take a rebuff and act childish about it.
Brother, what on Earth are you talking about? Rebuff to what? We’re not debating.
We’d like you to head up our project to tailor our new CLI for thumb-typing.
Compiz, XFCE, and GNOME <40 (now Cinnamon and MATE) proved quality UI design 15+ years ago.
It is actually insulting to Linux desktop that the default DE on the top distros don’t even have minimize and expand buttons by default, and that any extra features require DE plugins.
GNOME 40+ is like Wayland. Years of development for practically no real user improvements. Every update shows off features DEs had over a decade ago.
GNOME 47’s first listed big change is accent colors. wtf??? What the f*** do you think we’ve been using GTK and Qt for???
At least with KDE, the ram usage is justified. GNOME eats system resources just to give you a shitty ChomeOS UI that feels just as cheap.
The moment XFCE ports to Wayland, I’ll happily swap Compiz for Wayfire and use my computer like a normal person.
As long as I can still customize Gnome with some extensions for improved focus, it’ll stay my DE of choice.
I did that for a while, but ultimately got too frustrated due to a few things:
- Having to explore extensions in the first place for fairly basic functionally that I would have expected gnome to naturally implement
- Every update would break extensions, and I’d have to wait for the extension author to update it, and about a fourth of the time the extension was abandoned and I would just have to go without or search for a similar.
- At their best I always felt a lot of the extensions were having to settle for a lesser experience due to limitations of the extension mechanism.
Ultimately, I found that experience I was trying to get to that gnome never would normally support and would evaporate on updates and never be quite right anyway was just a natural featureset of Plasma. So I just do that and haven’t had to sweat updates nearly as much as when I kept trying to make a go of it with gnome shell. I kept giving it a shot because of my gnome 2 experience (admittedly augmented by compiz), but gnome 3/mutter have not been a good fit for me.
A lot of the hate seems to come from the people who spend an hour tweaking everything. For me I want it to work and be easy to use out of the box.
most of the things in gnome extensions should be built in and available from the settings. that being said there’s nothing stopping me from just using something else, hence why I use kde.
What is the difference between adding a extension and enabling a setting other than that a disabled feature is just bloat?
I mean any distro can serve the extension it wants
extensions (in my testing, typically in a VM of fedora or openSUSE) are a pain in the ass to use. it’s also difficult to find the one that I’m looking for because there’s generally several with the same name. something like a system tray (iirc the extension is “app indicators”) or having the dock always visible on the desktop (idk what the extension is called) are features that most people who don’t already use gnome rely on to some degree. these things are core functionality of most desktops precisely because most people use and like these features, and adding a few of the most popular features won’t add enough extra data to really be bloat.
quick sidenote, while typing this I realized the way I have been phrasing things may sound a little aggressive. it's not meant to, this is meant to be more of a breakdown of why I think what I do about gnome as a desktop. I'm not sure how to rephrase this to be less aggressive, so I'm leaving this bit right where I noticed it instead.I personally am very big on having all the customization I can get (kde user, obviously) but I actually did almost stick with gnome once. I tried vanilla is because orchid has just come out and while I was messing with it I found out that it had the dock extension available by default (was new to Linux at the time and didn’t know how to actually use extensions yet) and with that dock extension I didn’t mind gnome as much. the thing with gnome is that it has a lot of good ideas but it ruins a lot of them by only half-implementing what everyone else is already doing. most people would probably find it a lot more usable if it just had features that have been standard since literally the beginning of GUIs, and used to be standard in gnome.
Im not si much a customisation guy, but ended up with KDE and global apple theme, after all 🤭
But I see what GNOME is doing and support them, I think the Linux community as a whole profits from the work they do.
I agree with your opinion that, right now, it is very time consuming finding the right extensions that one need, but I think the problem is more the extension store having bad UI than extensions being bad as whole.
And what I meant is not that distributions are doing a great job right now, choosing what extensions to preinstall, more so that they are able to and that it would be a nice feature of a distro having some essential GNOME extensions preinstalled, even if default disabled.
I don’t use GNOME, but from what I’ve read (and from experience with other software that has extensions) they often break when GNOME updates.
The features would break if they were built in.
GNOME has clear philosophy and they work for themselves, not for you so they decide what features they care to invest time and what features they don’t care about.
Having a standardised method for plugins is in my opinion good enough, nobody forces you to use extensions. And if you don’t want extensions to break, then wait till the extensions are ready prior updating GNOME.
The features would break if they were built in.
You can’t know that and I can’t imagine it would be true. If the plugins many folks find essential were incorporated into GNOME itself then they’d be updated where necessary as a matter of course in developing a new release.
GNOME has clear philosophy and they work for themselves, not for you so they decide what features they care to invest time and what features they don’t care about.
You’re not wrong! This is an arrogant and common take produced in poor taste though. A holdover from the elitism that continues to plague so many projects. Design philosophy leads UX decision making and the proper first goal for any good and functional design is user accessibility. This is not limited to accomodations we deem worthy of our attention.
Good artists set ego aside to better serve their art. Engineers must set pet peeves aside to better serve their projects. If what they find irksome gets in the way of their ability to build functionally better bridges, homes, and software then it isn’t reality which has failed to live up to the Engineer’s standards. This is where GNOME, and many other projects, fall short. Defenders standing stalwart on the technical correctness of a volunteer’s lack of obligation to those whose needs they ostensibly labor for does not induce rightness. It exposes the masturbatory nature of the facade.
Engineers have every right to bake in options catering to their pet peeves (even making them the defaults). That’s not the issue. When those opinions disallow addressing the accessibility needs of those who like and use what they’ve built there is no justification other than naked pride. This is foolish.
Having a standardised method for plugins is in my opinion good enough, nobody forces you to use extensions. And if you don’t want extensions to break, then wait till the extensions are ready prior updating GNOME.
I agree! Having a standardized method for plugins is good, however; the argument which follows misses the point. GNOME lucked into a good pole position as one of the default GNU/Linux DEs and has enjoyed the benefit of that exposure. Continuing to ignore obvious failures in method elsewhere while enshrining chosen paradigms of tool use as sacrosanct alienates users for whom those paradigms are neither resonant nor useful.
No one will force Engineers to use accessibility features they don’t need. Not needing them doesn’t justify refusing the build them. Not building them as able is an abdication of social responsibility. If an engineer does not believe they have any social responsibility then they shouldn’t participate in projects whose published design philosophy includes language such as:
Their walk isn’t matching their talk in a few areas and it is right and good to call them to task for it.
Post statement: This is coming from someone who drives Linux daily, mostly from the console, and prefers GNOME to KDE. All of the above is meant without vitriol or ire and sent in the spirit of progress and solidarity.
You know how you start hallucinating in a sensory deprivation situation? I feel a lot of UX people just aren’t talking to users directly and thus we get whatever they hallucinate is a good design, disconnected from any actual user needs. Any user feedback only comes after they’ve made their mind up and is seen as the users being wrong, as the alternative is harder to deal with.
It’s free so I can’t really complain, but I can use KDE instead.
Thankfully Gnome is ridiculously customisable. The native experience is shit, but installing a few extensions fixes all the issues I had with it at least.
Hmm… I found it very difficult to customise Gnome. So I switched to Plasma.
That’s fair. A couple of programs I use are more compatible with Gnome so I had an incentive to get it working. My desktop is pretty much identical to KDE/Windows with a start menu (ArcMenu extension), a taskbar (Dash to Panel extension) and I’ve removed all keyboard shortcuts to the Overview eyesore and have prevented it from showing up at launch (No overview at start-up extension).
IMHO KDE is a better option than gnome. No need to tweak the UI to solve those issues.
I agree, but a couple of programs I use were specifically made compatible with Gnome. It only took me three extensions to make my UI look like KDE though, so it wasn’t too bad.
Moksha Desktop is Even better
I’ve been a big fan of gnome since the gnome2 days. I was ok with Gnome3 when it came out. Typically preferred it over plasma.
Having recently tried plasma, yeah it’s certainly the better desktop environment. They have done a fantastic job, very impressive.
I suspect QT is simply a better toolkit, however I have limited experience with gtk as qt fits my needs better for work. I’m excited to see where Iced and Cosmo goes, just wish iced had a stable webview (although a web socket is probably good enough for my needs anyway. )
5 minutes with extension manager in Bazzite and i had Gnome exactly how i wanted it. I also haven’t used Gnome in like 20 years.
Gnome does some questionable things, and some are just personal preference, but there is at least one thing that they do that makes zero sense regardless of how you use your system…
The AppIndicator extension SHOULD be default. There is no reason for it to be an extension other than pure stubbornness. There are applications that literally require it in order to function at all.
That you need an extension to disable the overview at startup still boggles my mind and the arrogance of the developers in the thread that started it didn’t lessen my antipathy for Gnome at all.
Why wouldn’t you want the overview at startup?
In my case because I have my PC connected to the TV and Steam starting automatically in big screen mode. But according to the devs I’m doing it wrong and should get used to it because it’s the better experience when I can go and grab my keyboard to start typing the name of the program I want to start.
Because you already set firefox to autostart
Because there is nothing to overwiew yet, obviously.
It provides easy access to search. I understand now though why you wouldn’t want it to open automatically (if you have startup programs you want to see instead).
actually, i just want to click one of my pinned panel favorites, but yeah, no need for search basically.
Default the cursor to the Search field on a Save dialog is possibly the absolute fucking stupidest thing ever.
I love GNOME and everytime I tried an other DE I came back to GNOME. But the cursor in the search field is annoying and incomprehensible…
I’ll be honest, I could probably use Gnome if I had to, with a few addons. But when I try it, the second I get to that dialog and it does that, I just shut it down and install something else. To me, it just epitomizes the contempt the developers have for the users, that it continues to exist after this long.
I’m triggered. Why would you even mention that.
I think the lack of a system tray in gnome is a case of perfect of being the enemy of good.
There’s a new Wayland protocol that probably will land in the next gnome release. The new protocol is supported by KDE and other desktops as well.
The reason that it was removed is because it is extremely hacky and bad. There have been talks within the project to just reads support since the extension got so many downloads but the new API is better anyway
Would you mind providing a link or the name of the new protocol?
ext-tray-v1https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/wayland/wayland-protocols/-/merge_requests/355There’s no reason to expect GNOME to implement it, and I’m surprised they haven’t NACKed it.
It literally was developed by gnome. The merge request is coming from a gnome developer.
You don’t have to like gnome but it is silly to try to gate keep over it.
“I understand that some compositors have no interest in allowing clients to show arbitrary content in tray areas. GNOME, for example, doesn’t even have a tray area and it is my understanding that they believe that even the current SNI protocols allow clients too much freedom. Such compositors should not implement this protocol.”
–the page you’re referencing, by the creator of the protocol
Which I find to be a weird stance.
Gnome also believes that a window must have control over its own titlebar to draw it as it sees fit while simultaneously declaring it must not have control over a tray icon.
Also funny that Gnome seems to have objected to KDE proposal and wrote their own even though they seem to say point blank that while they are dictating how all the other DEs will do it, they themselves will be ignoring it. Why get in the business of a protocol you don’t even want to implement in the first place…
Their solution to a problem is to pretend like it doesn’t exist simply because it will go away in the future? It’s a reason, but it isn’t a good one.
I won’t disagree with you there. They should’ve had a replacement before deprecating it. In there defense there was a alternative being developed but it ended up stalling over disagreements between KDE and gnome. The whole thing is a dumpster fire honestly. I’m glad they are cleaning it up. KDE and Gnome want the same thing for the most part they just kept getting into pointless bickering.
