Page 21 of 26 FirstFirst ... 111920212223 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 210 of 257

Thread: Fedora Proposal To Use Cinnamon Desktop By Default

  1. #201
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    35

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamish Wilson View Post
    Again, all of these complaints about hubris and ego when it seems to me that the anti-GNOME camp has evolved into a mutual moaning society that seems hell bent on bashing on anyone and everyone who disagrees with them. You do not get the sick irony of you bashing the GNOME devs for only allowing for their vision but then you do the exact same thing when espousing your own? Grow up everyone, please.
    Again, nobody here cares what desktop anyone uses. This discussion is about the default desktop only serving a minority of users and removing functionality that everyone else uses.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamish Wilson View Post
    Some people like GNOME Shell, such as kigurai, and this offends you. It goes against your worldview. Suck it up. Other people use a computer differently than you. It is about the freedom to choose and use what suits them best, something you people love to espouse but refuse to actually acknowledge applies to yourselves.
    It doesn't offend me at all, it's just that if his desktop is default then Cinnamon, XFCE, or Mate can't be. He is just part of a minority who's needs are met by the current default desktop.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamish Wilson View Post
    Also, here we have another example of the Gnome developers actually doing what you want which you then somehow use as an example of how they do not listen to you. Yeah, interesting that...

    And I am an Xfce user, so you can not just write off my comments as being from some raging Gnome Fanboy.
    This is NOT an example of gnome listening. This is the exact opposite. Since the release of Gnome Shell v1 people have begged Gnome to include a power off menu item and they stubbornly claimed that it belonged in GDM, not Gnome Shell. A year or two later they independently come to the same conclusion that everyone was telling them all along. That is what deserves ::

  2. #202
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Rural Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    1,030

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thalaric View Post
    Again, nobody here cares what desktop anyone uses. This discussion is about the default desktop only serving a minority of users and removing functionality that everyone else uses.
    Again, that is not what this sounds like here, and you certainly do not have enough of a handle of the wider picture to definitively say that it only serves a minority of users. This whole thread seems more like a witchhunt against GNOME users perpetrated by people who have gotten themselves so personally wound up in this battle that they have lost all sense of how to distance themselves from it in order to still think objectively. Please study your own motivations and assumptions here. You may be surprised with what you find out about yourself (as a general rule we should all be doing this all the time anyway, but we always do seem to need the reminder).

    Quote Originally Posted by thalaric View Post
    It doesn't offend me at all, it's just that if his desktop is default then Cinnamon, XFCE, or Mate can't be. He is just part of a minority who's needs are met by the current default desktop.
    Says who exactly? Just because you dislike it does not suddenly make it unusable or even the wrong choice for the default. There has certainly not been enough evidence posted here to say that it does not work for most people, or at the very least that it does not work best for the operating system as a whole. But in the end it is not mine or your call to make - it is up to the Project Board to make these decisions, and I am sure they do make them very carefully. Besides, it is not as if Fedora puts that much emphasis on defaults, and it is very open about pointing out the existence of spins. So I fail to understand the need for all of this egotistical flaming.

    Quote Originally Posted by thalaric View Post
    This is NOT an example of gnome listening. This is the exact opposite. Since the release of Gnome Shell v1 people have begged Gnome to include a power off menu item and they stubbornly claimed that it belonged in GDM, not Gnome Shell. A year or two later they independently come to the same conclusion that everyone was telling them all along. That is what deserves ::
    They implemented a feature as was prescribed by their design specification, it proved unpopular, and they eventually reverted it. How does this not equate to listening to their users? Of course any new change to the design needs to be justified, and many times politics and yes egos will get involved as this is still a human endeavour, but the simple fact is they did in the end accept the feedback and acted on it. Why is it so hard for you to acknowledge that? Same thing with the classic mode, which has no place in the grand scheme of Shell but is being worked on purely for the needs of a specific subset of users. As I said, this is still a human project, and the least you people can do is actually give credit where credit is due and try to be constructive whenever possible, instead of the arrogant posturing shown here.

  3. #203
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    366

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thalaric View Post
    Again, nobody here cares what desktop anyone uses. This discussion is about the default desktop only serving a minority of users and removing functionality that everyone else uses.



    It doesn't offend me at all, it's just that if his desktop is default then Cinnamon, XFCE, or Mate can't be. He is just part of a minority who's needs are met by the current default desktop.
    :
    Cinnamon has insignificant use outside of Mint, Mate is dead code, and XFCE is probably smaller than Gnome on Fedora and is still gtk2. Gnome 3 is the obvious choice. It's a living project and the project both Unity, Elementary OS, Consort, Cinnamon (and partly XFCE) parasite on, so it must have merits.... The only other desktop project with decently independent development is KDE and I get the impression Gnome is more popular than Kde on Fedora (and KDE has excellent packeting, and work perfect and is what I use by the way..)

  4. #204
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    35

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamish Wilson View Post
    Again, that is not what this sounds like here, and you certainly do not have enough of a handle of the wider picture to definitively say that it only serves a minority of users. This whole thread seems more like a witchhunt against GNOME users perpetrated by people who have gotten themselves so personally wound up in this battle that they have lost all sense of how to distance themselves from it in order to still think objectively. Please study your own motivations and assumptions here. You may be surprised with what you find out about yourself (as a general rule we should all be doing this all the time anyway, but we always do seem to need the reminder).
    Right, so what you're saying is that as a Fedora user who uses Cinnamon, I shouldn't comment in a forum topic called "Fedora Proposal To Use Cinnamon Desktop By Default". Further, I should ignore the polling that has already shown gnome shell to be a minority install (even on Fedora) and instead throw my hands up and exclaim "no information has come to light!" Maybe you should do some more research: http://blogs.gnome.org/otte/2012/07/...nto-the-abyss/

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamish Wilson View Post
    Says who exactly? Just because you dislike it does not suddenly make it unusable or even the wrong choice for the default. There has certainly not been enough evidence posted here to say that it does not work for most people, or at the very least that it does not work best for the operating system as a whole. But in the end it is not mine or your call to make - it is up to the Project Board to make these decisions, and I am sure they do make them very carefully. Besides, it is not as if Fedora puts that much emphasis on defaults, and it is very open about pointing out the existence of spins. So I fail to understand the need for all of this egotistical flaming.
    I'm sure the fact that Gnome has been forked no less than three times is indicative of a healthy project and increasing mind share. The only "egos" that are involved are those of people who are so completely invested in a project that has so completely failed half of it's users, that they are requesting it be removed as default in favor of *anything else*. For those invested users I'm sure that is a blow to their ego, which is where all that anger is coming from.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamish Wilson View Post
    They implemented a feature as was prescribed by their design specification, it proved unpopular, and they eventually reverted it. How does this not equate to listening to their users? Of course any new change to the design needs to be justified, and many times politics and yes egos will get involved as this is still a human endeavour, but the simple fact is they did in the end accept the feedback and acted on it. Why is it so hard for you to acknowledge that? Same thing with the classic mode, which has no place in the grand scheme of Shell but is being worked on purely for the needs of a specific subset of users. As I said, this is still a human project, and the least you people can do is actually give credit where credit is due and try to be constructive whenever possible, instead of the arrogant posturing shown here.
    I see it as a symptom of an unhealthy process, but I suppose someone could consider removing a feature under protest, only to then add it back a year later, as a success story.

  5. #205
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Rural Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    1,030

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thalaric View Post
    Right, so what you're saying is that as a Fedora user who uses Cinnamon, I shouldn't comment in a forum topic called "Fedora Proposal To Use Cinnamon Desktop By Default". Further, I should ignore the polling that has already shown gnome shell to be a minority install (even on Fedora) and instead throw my hands up and exclaim "no information has come to light!"
    As a Fedora user who uses Xfce I assure you I never said that you can not post in a forum thread, and find it rather offensive that you allege that I did. This does little to change my opinion of the motivations of a lot of the people posting here, and I still stand by what I said. Moving on to your other points, those polls are not indicative of much, have already had several of the conjectures made based on them debunked in this very thread, and are a poor way of gauging both interest in a project and it's suitability as the default desktop.

    Further, Gnome 3 is still the most popular choice on the FedoraForum poll (you claim it isn't), which is also a place frequented by enthusiasts who are likely to stray from the defaults anyway, especially on a distro like Fedora that encourages you to do so. The fact that it does in fact do this makes much of this discussion seem rather unimportant to me as one can hardly say that Fedora is terribly biased one way or another on this point

    Quote Originally Posted by thalaric View Post
    Maybe you should do some more research: http://blogs.gnome.org/otte/2012/07/...nto-the-abyss/

    I'm sure the fact that Gnome has been forked no less than three times is indicative of a healthy project and increasing mind share. The only "egos" that are involved are those of people who are so completely invested in a project that has so completely failed half of it's users, that they are requesting it be removed as default in favor of *anything else*. For those invested users I'm sure that is a blow to their ego, which is where all that anger is coming from.
    That blog post seems to contain a lot of hyperbole, and the listing of those developers leaving their work to pursue other things is completely beside the point and irrelevant, much like the conjecture being thrown about with regards to Alan Cox leaving Intel. Still, not all of the arguments are baseless, but if it is not enough to sway the Fedora Project Board then it will not change anything, especially as there are also many other listed reasons to leave Gnome 3 as default, which in of itself does not mean much anyway, despite of the fact you happen not to like it.

    As to your little rant there, I have already basically already given my thoughts on that point of view already. I would just like for everyone here to step back and realize how unreasonable they are being. If you want to think it is all these nasty GNOME developers then fine, but I am seeing a lot of ego and hubris on both sides here.

    Quote Originally Posted by thalaric View Post
    I see it as a symptom of an unhealthy process, but I suppose someone could consider removing a feature under protest, only to then add it back a year later, as a success story.
    Frame it how you like, it still demonstrates that they listened to their users. You can not escape that fact.

  6. #206
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    201

    Default

    Hamish, thank you for bringing some actual grown up debating to this "discussion".
    I think you summarized my views quite nicely, in a way that was much better than I did myself.

  7. #207
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    2

    Default

    Another lovely day in gnome dream land, lalalala.

  8. #208
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    35

    Default

    Hamish Wilson, in order to save time and avoid an endless back and forth about irrelevant topics, I am not going to directly refute every one of your statements. I just want to clarify a couple things.

    The first is, what is it exactly you believe my motivations are? I've made it pretty clear that the reason I'm posting here is because I do not care for Gnome Shell and would like Cinnamon (or a similar DE) to be the default. I happen to believe that Gnome Shell does not provide the features that most people need in a default desktop. If that is a problem for you, then I suggest you review your own motivations and assumptions.

    On the topic of Fedora, I probably didn't make myself very clear. My point was that Gnome Shell does not have majority adoption, being at less than 40%. Together Cinnamon, MATE and XFCE make up a slightly smaller but equally relevant share. This is the highest adoption for Gnome Shell, with the other distributions showing much worse numbers. That matters when compared to historical levels of Gnome adoption. It is obvious that the polls have limited use, they can only predict the popularity of each desktop environment, or lack thereof, among people who actually took the poll. That does not make them completely useless for gauging reception.

    That said, feel free to reject all of the provided data and observations that have been shared in this forum without providing any of your own.

  9. #209
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    201

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thalaric View Post
    they can only predict the popularity of each desktop environment, or lack thereof, among people who actually took the poll. That does not make them completely useless for gauging reception.
    I'm glad you at least recognize what I said earlier.
    Unfortunately "Not completely useless" and "useful" are not the same thing
    But if we want to throw meaningless numbers around, you can take the Phoronix poll. I find that poll completely useless, just as the other polls, but I guess you would categorize it differently, so let's look at the data: http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...2012_res&num=1

    "Which of the following most resemble your dekstop?"
    GNOME2+GNOME3: 993 (60%)
    Unity: 198
    KDE: 201
    Other: 260

    "What is the latest version of GNOME you are using?"
    3.x: 2986 (68%)
    2.x: 436
    Not using it: 947

    What conclusions can we draw from this?
    Well, none, because the poll, like most random Internet polls is badly done.
    But if we, just for the sake of argument, pretend that the numbers are actually an approximation of reality...
    These numbers are at least to me not something that screams "GNOME is dying!". Actually quite the opposite. GNOME seems to be doing pretty good.
    Also note that this is a poll hosted by Phoronix (not made by), and pretty much made to show how bad GNOME3 is doing. So I think we can quite safely assume that any bias would be *against* GNOME with regards to the demographics.
    Last edited by kigurai; 01-31-2013 at 06:27 AM. Reason: negations, negations

  10. #210
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    35

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kigurai View Post
    But if we want to throw meaningless numbers around, you can take the Phoronix poll. I find that poll completely useless, just as the other polls, but I guess you would categorize it differently, so let's look at the data
    Some are better than others, and anything lacking the words "Gnome Shell" is less useful. However we can take some things away from this poll just like the others. What I can't figure out is why you added Gnome2 and Gnome3 together.

    The real numbers are (adjusting for win and mac):

    Gnome3 666/1655 [40.24%]
    Gnome Not Gnome3 528/1655 [31.90%]

    It's almost looks like Fedora logged into phoronix.

Posting Permissions

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