GNOME Work Is Underway For Sharper Background Images

[whitecat]

But at least Android lets you place icons on your homescreen or change basic settings without third party tools , a luxury that you cannot find with Gnome.

Have you found a way to launch apps for the desktop icons on Gnome 3 ?
If yes, please tell me how !!

[Britoid]

It's almost as if people are allowed to have preferences.

[Mez']

Personally I find the GNOME3 user interface rather horrible, a sad copy of MacOS, very unfriendly to power users and developers. But I do appreciate that the big players like Redhat and Canonical invest in a common desktop. Maybe in the future they'll invest in a more user friendly interface.

Until they change their interface, I'll keep using Cinnamon, which is modern, friendly and usable for my work needs. It is also my goto choice for all enterprise linux desktops that I manage and never heard any complaints (unlike gnome3's interface).

I'm glad Fedora comes in a Cinnamon spin!

Personally, I find MacOS a sad user interface. Again, it's just a matter of personal preferences.

I don't believe Gnome or Unity were trying to copy here. The paradigm is way too different. But even if they did, I'm really happy of the outcome, it's so much better (to my taste that is) on every level. And in any case, if we are able to avoid the overpriced bling bling design of Apple and buy something sober and classy instead, it's a win big enough.

[gedgon]

Gnome Classic [...] its the default on Redhat.

No, it's not.

[jo-erlend]

Are you joking or is this sarcasm?

There's no inability to use desktop icons in the Gnome desktop but you need to use an extension for that ?
In that case I think we can also say that Gnome supports desktop icons very well by letting you delete it and install another DE that really supports that.

No, you don't need to use an extension. Your file manager can provide the icons, as it always has in Gnome. Gnome removed this from their FM because it was unmaintained and nobody was interested in supporting it, while they said the feature was blocking other things. Personally, I think that the desktop space should be managed by the desktop shell rather than a file manager or web browser, but if all you want are the Windows 95-like icons, your FM provides that for you. Caja is a fork of the traditional Gnome file manager and it still supports desktop icons.

So when I compared this to being able to run Firefox on KDE, I was being quite literal. KDE has its own web browser, but you can use other web browsers if you want to. In the same way, Gnome has its own file manager, but if you want to use another, you're more than welcome to.

[Mez']

We all know Cinnamon is based on gnome3 and thats a good thing and nobody cares if their team is small or large. What really matters is the final result, Cinnamon is a beautiful environment that is easy to use and comes with little clutter. Exactly what I need.

And I am not the only one thinking like this. Look at the statistics, once Fedora came out with gnome3, it almost lost all its user base... they bottomed out in popularity. Eventually they had to create "spins" with alternative desktops like Cinnamon and Xfce, to get back some of their users.

Even Redhat employees don't like gnome3...

I personally find it ugly and as said above, modern would be the last thing that pops to mind about it.

But my opinion doesn't matter (and yours doesn't either), what matters is that everyone is happy that you like it and that it is best for your own workflow. The point here is we all have a choice and we don't need to try and convince others what's best for them. It's actually just a matter of personal preference, and several others prefer Gnome, Unity, KDE, XFCE, Budgie, etc... because they deem one of these what suits their workflow better. We are lucky to have this choice. Please embrace it instead of going in a vain and worthless argument on which one's better. And on this I'm not pointing the finger on you specifically.

[ermo]

Given the choice between GNOME Shell and KDE Plasma Desktop, I would have traditionally chosen GNOME Shell.

However, these days the only place I rely on GNOME Shell is on my HTPC because the big interface elements lend themselves well to couch-surfing, the GNOME applications are so pared down and simple and because the virtual desktop animation is nice (I've set my system up to autologin to a GNOME Shell session in which Kodi is started in full screen automatically).

My proper Linux desktop PCs are Plasma now and I really like ngraham 's push to get all the papercuts in KDE fixed. The work on achieving gvfs feature parity via kio-fuse in the upcoming Plasma Desktop 5.18 was the clincher for me.

My old must-work-no-matter-what-as-a-backup laptop is MATE with Brisk Menu, which is basically a lightly refreshed GNOME 2 experience. This is a compromise because I need to be able to test the functionally of certain software on all major DEs as part of my maintainer duties.

[240Hz]

240Hz Sigh. It’s a special session to bring up the extensions, themes and so on.

Maintenance cost is < 1/10 of rolling your own complete stack.

ubuntu is using the gnome3 desktop.

[240Hz]

240Hz sorry but the Ubuntu Desktop just proved you wrong.

What the hell is ubuntu desktop? Are you talking about Gnome 3 with 2 extensions? This is not a new "desktop"

[Danny3]

You might be looking for this extension:
https://extensions.gnome.org/extensi...desktop-icons/

Thnaks for sharing this, but for me this is a core feature that I want in every OS that I use.
Either is built-in and properly supported or it doesn't exist.
I don't have the time and the will to jump through hoops for core features like this.

Thanks again for the good will!