No announcement yet.

Clear Linux Switches From Xfce To GNOME, Benchmarks

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #81
    Originally posted by leipero View Post
    you did ripped few out of context.
    I take sentences out to make sure people know what part of their post I'm talking about. I don't copy the rest of the paragraph to save space.

    Yes, those are OS independent statistics, however, they are not pointless to GNU/Linux, statistics could be quite different, so that whole thing is in one sentence and relates to your other question/quote of you asking me about "without doubt" thing considering KDE, sure, you can say it is my own speculation, but what here isn't speculation? This is informed speculation, based on common sense and experience,
    I'm trying to get actual data even if crappy, and clean it up by aggregating it, that's not speculation, it's scientific method.
    The result still kinda sucks but is more reliable than going by "common sense" and personal experience since it at least have a larger dataset.

    I really doubt tehre would be anyone who would argue that KDE is more popular (in percentage) in any other place compaered to it.
    In case you didn't notice, I am. Why should KDE be more popular in germany? For that matter there are at least a couple french distros that have it as main DE and you know french like stuff with a french website and all.

    Well, as i said, polls are nonsense,a dn you can make it to be whatever you want to be, and it is very dependent on env.
    As I said, I'm not counting the single poll, but the results of most polls I've seen (the ones that don't have obvious bias like asking only to Fedora users or similar).

    And the result is "no clear winner".

    Also, not to say KDE wasn't buggier too (I didn't switch until 5) but Ubuntu routinely got things wrong on KDE (and also Systemd in my experience and probably on other things) in multiple occasions. There is a reason if KDE people made their own ubuntu spin.

    Well I disagree with you here, "distro hoppers" are not unusual thing at all considering those downloads, but you might have a point here, since msot people who install Arch know what they want, and they tend to do less "distro hopping",
    I repeat, most people use their PC to do stuff, not as a test bed for software. This is always true.

    still, argument of location still stands,
    True but it is an issue only if german people massively prever KDE for some reason, and I have never seen evidence of that.

    and I am not sure about Manjaro, I know it have it's own repositories, and I'm not sure if it shares enough Arch repositories to make an impact on those statistics.
    AFAIK Manjaro and Chakra rebuild Arch from source and sign their own packages, so they should not have impact there.

    Why would I be buthurt?
    Because you started pulling GTK for the sake of showing GNOME is more common, when GNOME is a DE and not a desktop toolkit.
    I'm not hating GNOME 3 because of the shape of its bars and buttons, or because of its internal program interfaces.

    I liked Cinnamon (till X apps, idk what they are thinking with it...), but that doesn't change the fact it is GNOME-based distro, in fact GNOME-3 based distro, if we speak about MATE, it is copy paste of gnome 2, with some improvements and quite a bit of developement, so, if it walks like a duck....,
    GNOME-based != GNOME 3.
    Most people won't say MATE, Cinnamon and GNOME 3 are the same thing, they look quite different and it's not just a theme.

    Minor nitpicking: I wouldn't call them GNOME-based, but GNOME fork. MATE took what was GNOME before the famous/infamous GNOME 3 UI redesign, Cinnamon forked and changed GNOME 3 to be as it was before and went off their own way. The result is quite different.

    A GNOME-based DE would be Budgie, that is basically a bunch of patches changing the shell only, on top of upstream GNOME.

    while it is true that GTK+ does not equal GNOME, it is also true that GNOME project did GTK toolikt, and that most DE's use that toolkit not because GNOME Project developers used gun on their head and made them use it, but because other reasons.
    GTK is unrelated to UI choices that made GNOME 3 famous/infamous, it's a toolkit. I'm talking of DE, which is user interface and default programs like filemanager, not its rendering middleware.

    Cinnamon and MATE are completely different, as i said already, Cinnamon is based on GNOME 3 while MATE is based on GNOME 2, however, MATE developers transitioned it to GTK3+ toolkit, still gnome 2 base tho. Cinnamon and Plasma have more in common layout/design than MATE and any of the two, at least default layout.
    Dunno, I used MATE and XFCE for a long while and I find MATE, Cinnamon, XFCE and KDE (and Windows XP/7 for that matter) very similar in overall layout and design.


    • #82
      Originally posted by Griffin View Post
      Peppercats. Go figure. A usable linux desktop can't be heavily customizable. You will run out of developer resources.
      Originally posted by Griffin View Post
      Oh. And as a big FU to those who claim Gnome can't be customized. Ubuntu will customize theme and add a few extensions to the session.
      Griffin is starting to lose his grip.


      • #83
        Originally posted by ldo17 View Post
        I think we can agree that all GUIs suck.
        Please find a source that isn't obviously contradicting your statements as this way you only make a fool out of yourself. That blog writer said in the first paragraph:

        Seems like the CLI has become unfashionable to many, while the GUI is the preferred way of doing things.
        Really, the optimum way to use a computer nowadays is with a combination of both (CLI and GUI).


        • #84
          Originally posted by grege View Post

          Currently 81 pages of extensions and Gnome is labelled as not configurable. You can bend it and shape it and theme it anyway your imagination can manage.
          As long as the extension does not break because they break API again.

          Other desktops offer knobs and settings to do so, not third party "patches". That way on average your customizations survive updates better.

          And note that also Cinnamon has the same issue.


          • #85
            Originally posted by sirblackheart View Post

            wasn't he banned some months ago for taking his own trolling a little bit to seriously?

            THAT'S a thing?!!!


            • #86
              Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
              Please find a source that isn't obviously contradicting your statements as this way you only make a fool out of yourself. That blog writer said in the first paragraph:

              Seems like the CLI has become unfashionable to many, while the GUI is the preferred way of doing things.
              Really, the optimum way to use a computer nowadays is with a combination of both (CLI and GUI).
              CLI has always had inferior discoverability since guis came into their own. This could change, but if won't until we abandon terminal emulation of $pickYourStandard


              • #87
                Originally posted by liam View Post

                CLI has always had inferior discoverability ...
                What do you mean?

                [email protected]:~> man -k discoverability
                discoverability: nothing appropriate.


                • #88
                  Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
                  MS's win8 market penetration, for starters. Main reason Windows 8 failed hard was the weird interface not suited for desktop pcs. GNOME3 has way too much resemblance to that.
                  That is nothing but assumptions on your side. Till you bring hard evidence trough relevant user studies showing that GNOMES HIG and GUI causing troubles to several different people (including those not having trouble adapting to new and efficient mental models) in comparison to the ones you mentioned you are doing no better then Griffing here.
                  Not everyone wants to be stuck on the win95 and pre methaphers. But I understand that there are people having trouble to adapt their long trained mental models so I think it is great there are several open source DE out their tailored to their needs.
                  Last edited by sirblackheart; 26 May 2017, 06:20 AM.


                  • #89
                    Originally posted by dragon321 View Post
                    GTK complicate configuration of environment? It's only toolkit. Configuration options depends on application/DE developers. And what "break API" You meant? GTK 3 has stable API now. It won't be changed until GTK4.
                    Yes, it makes harder to write feature rich applications. Wow, it has stable API after so many years of broken themes compatibility?


                    • #90
                      Originally posted by leipero View Post

                      How you managed to miss what i wrote is beyond me..., I gave an argument that KDE is NOT as customizable as you KDE fans claim it to be, i gave simple example of privacy settings, you didn't even bother to cover that section, why? If having ability to change the theme and layout out of the box (mind you GNOME can do that perfectly fine with tweak tool, in fact I don't use standard theme or layout - slightly different layout) is priority over privacy settings for you, hey, that's fine with me, but not addressing my argument is very dishonest, and I am not going into GTK+ and it's pros and cons, it's a toolkit, and it is constantly evolving, it's mostly not object oriented, and that is a good thing in my view, less confusing..., but that's beside the point.
                      So, we have one option in Gnome which is missing in KDE vs. dozens of options in KDE not available in Gnome. Take a look at panel customization, Dolphin features and so on. KDE is far more customizable and I don't mean themes.

                      From multiple studies, it is known fact that most people do not cunstomize theming etc., you would be suprized how meny people do not chage their desktop background even.
                      We need such study for Gnome which is far from standard desktop principles.