Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fedora Proposal To Use Cinnamon Desktop By Default

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by bkor View Post
    I think you read my reply a bit too quickly, I said a new component, not that it would move to GNOME shell.
    Then I fail to see the relevance of your response to my criticism of gnome shell.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by thalaric View Post
      Exactly, Cinnamon makes Gnome3 technology useful again.
      So does Gnome Shell. Usefulness depends of users themselves wishing to add functionality through extensions. Cinnamon demonstrated Gnome Shell flexibility which hardly needs to be forked.
      Gnome Classic (using well crafted extensions) made Cinnamon moot.

      This is a problem with large amounts of windows open, and the traditional fix is application grouping. Personally I prefer it without grouping to save a click since I usually don't have over 10 windows open on each workspace.
      You can use shortcut keys to navigate. Having several windows from the same applications: use Alt+`

      Faster.
      How? Which method?

      Comment


      • Originally posted by finalzone View Post
        So does Gnome Shell. Usefulness depends of users themselves wishing to add functionality through extensions. Cinnamon demonstrated Gnome Shell flexibility which hardly needs to be forked.
        Gnome Classic (using well crafted extensions) made Cinnamon moot.
        Linux Mint started with gnome shell extensions. MGSE was abandoned in favor of something that would be less limiting.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by thalaric View Post
          Then I fail to see the relevance of your response to my criticism of gnome shell.
          I quoted exactly what I responded to, namely that Nautilus doesn't allow for rendering background anymore. Suggest to actually read, not be so aggressive towards me.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by eliac View Post
            Take a deep breath and read my post again.
            I answered intellivision about something like krunner - supposedly used in a keyboard centered workflow - vs launching applications via a full screen launcher. My answer is that a properly done full screen launcher is as good as a top bar for such job. The same is true of gnome-do and can be true of searchable menu systems like in cinnamon or other environments.
            I did not write anything about Gnome shell being specifically faster than any of the other good options, nor did I set up any straw man.
            What I did say is that the design of the application launcher as a full screen interface makes sense for an intrinsically disrupting operation such as starting a new application. On the other hand someone finds gnome shell's overview too distracting as a task switcher. I can't really say how much of that is simply the habit of having a task bar, but I'm glad they are getting one with official support in 3.8
            I don't know who you're assigning to your mythical "you people" group, but you're barking under the wrong tree here. I'm simply interested in UI design, whatever OS and DE I can find useful ideas in.
            Apologies. I did not realize that Krunner was a keyboard launcher like Gnome Do, so I didn't realize the context of your response. I thought it was an argument redirecting from Gnome Shell's difficult GUI by promoting it's key bindings. My patience for that tactic is getting thin as of late.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by bkor
              I quoted exactly what I responded to, namely that Nautilus doesn't allow for rendering background anymore. Suggest to actually read, not be so aggressive towards me.
              Perhaps you don't understand my original criticism. Gnome Shell does not do anything useful with the desktop nor do they support nautilus controlling the desktop. Whether or not code from nautilus is going to be placed in a different component is irrelevant unless Gnome Shell has plans to use that component. I doubt they do, because putting useful things anywhere but in the overlay does not follow their design strategy.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by finalzone View Post
                Usefulness depends of users themselves wishing to add functionality through extensions.
                Because the average user is definitely going to sit down and learn to write extensions just to add functionality that the developers refuse to countenance, and then maintain it as future updates break them.

                Or they could just dump it and switch to a GUI that's actually useful out of the box, as so many previous Gnome 2 users have done.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by movieman View Post
                  Because the average user is definitely going to sit down and learn to write extensions just to add functionality that the developers refuse to countenance, and then maintain it as future updates break them.
                  The word "average user" is overly abused as a cloak for the lack of active participation from those spending their time flaming and whining how their holy functionalities are missing.
                  Many developers have priority to work on core functionality and will including extras one coming from the extensions as demonstrated by the incoming Gnome Classic. The key point is look at the reason of the refusal and find a better way to communicate in a respectful manner.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by finalzone View Post
                    The word "average user" is overly abused as a cloak for the lack of active participation from those spending their time flaming and whining how their holy functionalities are missing.
                    Many developers have priority to work on core functionality and will including extras one coming from the extensions as demonstrated by the incoming Gnome Classic. The key point is look at the reason of the refusal and find a better way to communicate in a respectful manner.
                    Hobbyist mentality aside, if it doesn't contain the functionality that you need out of the box and requires end-user hacking, then it is not worth using.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by thalaric View Post
                      For the love of all that is holy will you people please stop using keybindings to attack a strawman? Gnome Shell's ability to be controlled by the keyboard is excellent, no one ever disputed that.
                      How is it a strawman? I keep being told that Shell is a tablet-style OS, designed with touch screens in mind. And yet you acknowledge it has excellent keyboard support, and it's the mouse/touch interaction that's receiving the criticism. And *that* doesn't sound much like a tablet UI to me...

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Pawlerson View Post
                        To answer your stupidity: polls are actually correct, because percentage clearly shows gnome lost compared to other environments. To answer your stupidity more: most KDE, XFCE and Cinnamon users are unaware of pletora of different forums that exist. Now, you've got to show me polls where gnome is more popular. Check gnome numbers in Arch and Mint and tell me what don't you understand?
                        Are you sure calling names is a good way of discussing things?
                        I don't have to show you anything to prove my point. My point is that polls can show anything depending on what and how you ask.
                        If I asked which DE was used at my department GNOME would probably exceed 90%, with Unity coming up second.
                        I am not saying that this is because GNOME is in anyway better, but because that is how things just happen to look.
                        I don't think those poll numbers would say anything about the popularity of any DE, do you?

                        They don't listen to users and this is also a fact that you even confirmed. So, they're some kind of sect with some strange vision? Ignoring smart critique just to follow some idiotic vision is well... idiotic.
                        There is a difference between having a vision and not accepting user input.
                        You don't like the GNOME vision, and that is unfortunate. Luckily you can just choose to use something else that is in line with your own ideas. That would also save you a few hours of forum-battles

                        Like what?
                        From the top of my head: "ALSA works fine!", "Static routes are not working".

                        Nope and they keep removing features - Nautilus. Current version is just a joke.
                        Not sure which functionality you are missing. I use nautilus daily and can't think of anything.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by finalzone View Post
                          The word "average user" is overly abused as a cloak for the lack of active participation from those spending their time flaming and whining how their holy functionalities are missing.
                          Many developers have priority to work on core functionality and will including extras one coming from the extensions as demonstrated by the incoming Gnome Classic. The key point is look at the reason of the refusal and find a better way to communicate in a respectful manner.
                          We wouldn't have this argument in the first place if Gnome developers didn't actively remove functionality!

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by yogi_berra View Post
                            Hobbyist mentality aside, if it doesn't contain the functionality that you need out of the box and requires end-user hacking, then it is not worth using.
                            Then don't use it, and let the people whose functionality needs it does fulfil use it. Surely this is just common sense. This is not directed specifically at you, but I am constantly in awe at how much time and energy is wasted in religious wars over personal preferences. Our renewable energy problems could be easily solved if we stick a few hot heads under a boiler and tell them that the other persons' favourite colours are different.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Vim_User View Post
                              And there it is again. I tried Gnome Shell, just to see what all the fuss is about. And I don't like it. Full stop.
                              And that now indicates that I have lost the ability to learn something new? Where did you get from? In the last three years I learned many DEs and WMs until I came to the point where I have found the one that fits my needs best. It is i3, not Gnome Shell. Because I can make it behave exactly like I want without any restrictions or the need for externally developed extensions. Because it supports my workflow instead of forcing me to a different one.

                              Now, please tell me: How is that even possible, how have I learned to configure and use i3 most efficiently when I have lost the ability to learn new things because I don't like Gnome Shell? How got I used to the shortcomings of old things when I have searched a long time to find something that has no shortcomings for me?

                              Clearly, I don't like GS, I must be dumb and unable to learn, not able to use the new shiny thing that has exactly zero advantages for me.
                              Hey, I have NEVER said YOU lost the ability to learn.
                              Someone likes DE AAA. Someone likes DE BBB. That's all OK. I've tried KDE4 many times but failed in switching to it in the Gnome2 era.

                              What I can't understand is: "Do not change ANYTHING because I've used to it."
                              Yes! GS has many problems and made many stupid errors (and I've to tweak it after each upgrade). But it's much better than "stop moving! I'm here."
                              And most of my problems can be solved by its powerful extensions (I don't know your cases so I can't make suggestions, sorry)

                              IMO, the best part of GS is its extension. I can overpass all GS's shortages just because of it.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Delgarde View Post
                                How is it a strawman? I keep being told that Shell is a tablet-style OS, designed with touch screens in mind. And yet you acknowledge it has excellent keyboard support, and it's the mouse/touch interaction that's receiving the criticism. And *that* doesn't sound much like a tablet UI to me...
                                It's a strawman because the keybindings are not what is being criticized. Further, similar keybindings are available on every desktop environment; Cinnamon's equivalent functionality, gnome do, krunner and dmenu have all been mentioned in this forum multiple times. Working keybindings in no way excuse an inefficient graphical interface. I never said Gnome Shell was only for mobile devices, I said it was inspired by mobile devices and they were a constraint on the design. The entire problem is that Gnome Shell uses small formfactor metaphors inappropriately on the desktop.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X