It's Been Three Years Since "GNOME 4.0" Was Proposed

[onlinepancakes]

i still can't move the top bar in gnome 3 to the bottom. this is why i don't like gnome 3. basic stuff like this is gone.

[jo-erlend]

It seems to me that a lot of people are brainwashing themselves. Look at how many posts are about how Gnome _forces_ Gnome Shell and that instead, it should provide an alternative. Well, that's what Gnome does. You have the classic desktop from Gnome 2 and you have the new Gnome Shell. You don't have to use Gnome Shell, like a lot of people seem to have successfully convinced themselves. The Gnome Panel desktop was always there and still is. The problem is that such a huge number of people refuse to talk about things they like, instead focusing on what they _don't_ like. That way, the classic desktop gets no attention, leading more people to think it no longer exists. This has been a problem for years now. But it's still there. If you want something like Mate, but based on Gnome 3 rather than Gnome 2, then look at Gnome Flashback. And of course, if you want Gnome 2, then just use Mate.

[onlinepancakes]

seems to me you're stuck in 2008 and now just wait for the world to catch up. the idea of desktop and touch being different was tried and failed process ever since then,

which is why microsoft went a 180 with 10 right and got rid of most of the metro touch screen stuff by default they added in 8? made it more mouse and keyboard friendly? gave the options to pick and choose now between touch approach or mouse + keyboard?

if microsoft can realize forcing touch stuff on a desktop OS isn't a good idea, why can't gnome?

[finalzone]

which is why microsoft went a 180 with 10 right and got rid of most of the metro touch screen stuff by default they added in 8? made it more mouse and keyboard friendly? gave the options to pick and choose now between touch approach or mouse + keyboard?
if microsoft can realize forcing touch stuff on a desktop OS isn't a good idea, why can't gnome?

You are sadly mistaken and misinformed by comparing Windows 8 interface with Gnome Shell thinking the latter was made for touch screen only. Gnome Shell allows more accessibility with keyboard than mouse. As mentioned on previous posts, Gnome Classic is available for those looking at the legacy Gnome 2, RHEL7 and its derivate CentOS 7 uses Gnome Classic by default.
What is annoying on some post is the abuse of the word "Forcing" omitting that the work are done by the developers and designer on their spare time. Those complainers forgot they can get alternative as they wish.

[brk0_0]

which is why microsoft went a 180 with 10 right and got rid of most of the metro touch screen stuff by default they added in 8? made it more mouse and keyboard friendly? gave the options to pick and choose now between touch approach or mouse + keyboard?

if microsoft can realize forcing touch stuff on a desktop OS isn't a good idea, why can't gnome?

Because Windows 8 had a esquizofrenic UI: there were two separate modes (desktop and metro) each with its own apps, glued by a button. That doesn't happen with GNOME. I introduced GNOME 3 in the small network I administer, and nobody (nobody) ever said it's meant to be used on touch screens.

[GraysonPeddie]

It seems to me that a lot of people are brainwashing themselves. Look at how many posts are about how Gnome _forces_ Gnome Shell and that instead, it should provide an alternative. Well, that's what Gnome does. You have the classic desktop from Gnome 2 and you have the new Gnome Shell. You don't have to use Gnome Shell, like a lot of people seem to have successfully convinced themselves. The Gnome Panel desktop was always there and still is. The problem is that such a huge number of people refuse to talk about things they like, instead focusing on what they _don't_ like. That way, the classic desktop gets no attention, leading more people to think it no longer exists. This has been a problem for years now. But it's still there. If you want something like Mate, but based on Gnome 3 rather than Gnome 2, then look at Gnome Flashback. And of course, if you want Gnome 2, then just use Mate.

+1!

And there are always extensions to configure the GNOME desktop how you like. I love what GNOME is progressing with GNOME/GTk3 3.18, but there are some things I'd like to have if you refer to my post with my screenshot of my desktop.

My question is for those who love KDE, can KDE take advantage of what GNOME has to offer in terms of simplicity and Mac-like header bars for applications? Why be so stuck with Windows XP-liked desktop environments? Why not a desktop environments/window manager (other than tiled window managers) take a desktop metaphor to a whole new direction? Maybe a desktop environment that is mobile-first and desktop-second? Something that Unity is trying to do for convergence. Give a desktop environment a mobile interface that scales up to large screens! Oh WAIT A DAMN MINUTE there is a STUPID BACKLASH going on with that direction... *sigh*

People should give GNOME 3.16 a try just for one month and stop brainwashing themselves.

Now granted, I don't like Windows 8/8.1. I could care less for the tiled interfaces of Windows Phones (no, not to be confused with Windows Mobile--6.5 or earlier) and all that stupid flatness that came with it. I prefer realism and that's why I love so much about Windows 7. Of course, Mac OS 10.10 Yosemite did went away with realism and went with flat icons. Now that does not stop me from buying a Mac Mini (high-end, mind you) as I used to use a Mac when I was at school decades ago (I'm 32 years old, soon to be 33).

Heh... Maybe I'm just a bit anti-Linux but I am very much anti-Windows (I like the freedom to modify how I want to use my desktop and change the way I like to work, including the underlying parts of the system). *sigh*

[misGnomer]

It seems to me that a lot of people are brainwashing themselves. Look at how many posts are about how Gnome _forces_ Gnome Shell and that instead, it should provide an alternative. Well, that's what Gnome does. You have the classic desktop from Gnome 2 and you have the new Gnome Shell. You don't have to use Gnome Shell, like a lot of people seem to have successfully convinced themselves. The Gnome Panel desktop was always there and still is. The problem is that such a huge number of people refuse to talk about things they like, instead focusing on what they _don't_ like. That way, the classic desktop gets no attention, leading more people to think it no longer exists. This has been a problem for years now. But it's still there. If you want something like Mate, but based on Gnome 3 rather than Gnome 2, then look at Gnome Flashback. And of course, if you want Gnome 2, then just use Mate.

Yeah, maybe we people really are brainwashing ourselves.

When Gnome 2 was shoved into "maintenance mode" (to rot) and Gnome 3 was pushed down the channels there was no "classic" desktop option initially and when it was later grudgingly made available it was a pathetic ghost of its former self.

With corporate funding from some of the big boys the Gnome crew felt they could simply tell their former users "my way or highway".

They had pulled something similar with the Gnome 1.x to 2.x migration already. 1.x was probably the most moddable desktop of its era and over time most users had learnt to customize their workflows. Gnome 2 brought much-needed plumbing sanity, but it was a mere skeleton and enormous amount of very useful functionality was discarded at a flip of a switch.

I was forced to switch to other desktops until usability began returning later in the 2.x cycle.

Then when the 2.x had again started filling out nicely to users' needs the Gnome crew pulled the same stunt again with Gnome 3.

Lot of us know certain saying involving "fooling", "once" and "twice".


Now, again Gnome (now at 3.xx) seems to be getting somewhere, but I wish I could show you with my fingers how much credibility they have left in my eyes.

Even if I don't trust them I do wish them well. The GTK+ issues don't seem to be going away however and Qt would seem to be the sane choice for someone wanting to create a modern and extensible desktop/UI these days.

I stopped getting involved in these discussions because it was like talking to a wall (Hello, Gnome! Hello?) and some people would often end up getting over-excited, rude and angry, but I thought it was important to remind some enthusiastic Gnome supporters why some others exhibit a little less enthusiasm.


And jo-erlend, if by brainwashed you mean conditioned by past traumatic experiences, then sure, call me brainwashed. Face your daemons and move forward.

[grndzro]

i still can't move the top bar in gnome 3 to the bottom. this is why i don't like gnome 3. basic stuff like this is gone.

https://extensions.gnome.org/extension/898/mmod-panel/ You can move the panel to the bottom.

Overall I am very happy with my Fedora Gnome 3 install. Gnome 3.16 is spectacular after some tweaking. Although my main is currently Antergos XFCE, I wouldn't dream of switching my secondary OS from Gnome.

I use Workspaces to dock with the integrated favorites menu, Hide top bar, Gnomenu, taskbar, impatience, shutdown timer, add suspend button, lock keys, cafeine, Weather app, and all the hide icon stuff.

All bars are on instant autohide. Impatience is set at max. Taskbar is only running apps with a huge preview droppdown. Topleft hot corner is disabled because Gnomenu works just as well.

Anyone who says Gnome 3 isn't great simply hasn't used it recently or tweaked it.

[Delgarde]

- the general design idea to see one program at a time is quite limiting too

I don't see how G3 is different from previous versions in that respect... I have a few apps which I always run full-screen because they need as much screen space as they can get e.g an IDE, or a photo-editing app), but stuff like browser, email, chat... they all run on the same workspace, all visible at once, since none of them really needs to be fullscreen.

[Delgarde]

if microsoft can realize forcing touch stuff on a desktop OS isn't a good idea, why can't gnome?

What touch stuff? Sure, G3 is probably more usable on a touch-screen than it's predecessor - but it's also much better for keyboard users too.