Originally posted by dragon321
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Clear Linux Switches From Xfce To GNOME, Benchmarks
Collapse
X
-
Guest replied
-
Originally posted by starshipeleven View PostMS'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.
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.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by starshipeleven View PostPlease 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).
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by grege View Posthttps://extensions.gnome.org/
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.
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.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by ldo17 View PostI think we can agree that all GUIs suck.
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).
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Griffin View PostPeppercats. Go figure. A usable linux desktop can't be heavily customizable. You will run out of developer resources.Originally posted by Griffin View PostOh. 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.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by leipero View Postyou did ripped few out of context.
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,
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.
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.
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",
still, argument of location still stands,
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.
Why would I be buthurt?
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....,
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.
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.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by sirblackheart View PostAccording to whose study?
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: