Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
GNOME GUI KDE Programming Linux

GNOME 3: Beauty To the Bone? 647

someWebGeek writes "According to the GNOME design crew, as reported by Allan over at As Far as I Know, GNOME 3 will represent a new approach to GNOME application design. The design patterns being developed and employed may effect a new, prettier interface, but more importantly a new mindset about the entire project, a mindset intended to encourage greater deep beauty in the application layers below the user interface. Maybe...for now, I'm sticking to the sinking ship of KDE in the Ubuntu ocean."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

GNOME 3: Beauty To the Bone?

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 13, 2012 @11:15PM (#39028393)

    Developers at Gnome have reduced the entire UI to a single button and they're even trying to get rid of that.

    • Re:To the Bone! (Score:4, Insightful)

      by TheGoodNamesWereGone ( 1844118 ) on Monday February 13, 2012 @11:31PM (#39028515)
      It sure isn't usability to the bone...
    • Dev (Score:5, Funny)

      by sakdoctor ( 1087155 ) on Monday February 13, 2012 @11:35PM (#39028545) Homepage

      But that's what the usability studies indicate that users want this.
      The ONLY reason you don't love it yet, is because you haven't learned the new paradigm, or you're too stupid to do so.

      Ok, no more negative feed back please, La la la la la la la I CAN'T HEAR YOU.

    • "And we push it before it leaves the factory."

    • by mwvdlee ( 775178 )

      Developers at Gnome have reduced the entire UI to a single button and they're even trying to get rid of that.

      They'll remove the button layout and make the entire screen into a single button.
      Next step will be a completely new system wherein clicking on different areas in the "One Click Interface" will cause different actions.

    • by rastos1 ( 601318 ) on Tuesday February 14, 2012 @02:54AM (#39029705)

      reduced the entire UI to a single button

      Why is that modded "+5 Funny"? Every office printer these days has only one button. You press it briefly to do make a copy, you press it 5 seconds to clean the cache, you press it 10 seconds to print a test page .... There is also only one LED to helpfully indicate various error codes such as paper jam, out of toner, no paper in tray. Clearly it must be the most ergonomic interface ever, because every printer vendor does this. I don't see why this would not work for desktop UI?

      • Re:To the Bone! (Score:5, Insightful)

        by synthesizerpatel ( 1210598 ) on Tuesday February 14, 2012 @03:48AM (#39029971)

        Sarcasm aside, drawing the distinction between why one would do this on a printer vs. why one wouldn't want to do it on a desktop UI.

        The reason printers have less and less buttons (when possible) can more accurately be attributed to a cost-cutting feature (less buttons == less hardware to manufacture, less moving parts to replace when they break in the field, less warranty problems, etc). If you don't get bothered by having to hold buttons down to get them to exercise new behaviors - this is all fine and good.

        If I had to click and hold anything for 10 seconds in a UI I'd find a new UI. While pixels are finite on a desktop, they're still free.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward

          I am going to be horrendously pedantic here and may be accused of trolling and being a grammar nazi, for which I apologise. But this is really annoying!!!

          Use LESS when you are talking about stuff that you CANNOT COUNT. Like water, sand or hardware.
          Use FEWER for things that you CAN COUNT. Like buttons, moving parts, warranty problems.

          Apart from that, spot on.

      • Sounds like a 1x1 display would be the ergonomic optimum.

      • by Dusty101 ( 765661 ) on Tuesday February 14, 2012 @09:34AM (#39031563)

        And it can use the single LED to flash out "PC Load Letter" in Morse code.

    • by ras ( 84108 )

      Developers at Gnome have reduced the entire UI to a single button and they're even trying to get rid of that.

      Yes, they are. But since they haven't achieved that yet, they took an interim step: to eliminate all confusion about where to press the button, all buttons are now full screen.

    • Re:To the Bone! (Score:4, Insightful)

      by hairyfeet ( 841228 ) <> on Tuesday February 14, 2012 @11:25AM (#39032981) Journal

      You joke Mr AC but this kind of crazy is a prime example of why itch scratching and ignoring the users makes Linux a giant fail on the desktop.

      I'm sure i'll get hate for not drinking the koolaid and joining the perception bubble but fuck it, I'm a frustrated retailer and this needs to be said. For the first time in history you are being given not one, not two, but THREE incredible gifts, its like the field has been cleared and you are being given a 200 yard head start on a 300 yard race and what do you do? promptly shoot yourselves in the foot and then plop down in the middle of the field to tweet about the latest idea you have for REALLY pissing the users off!

      I mean you have your traditional nemesis run by the most incompetent CEO since Apple had the Pepsi and not only that but he's about to shoot his own company right in the face because he is so desperate to get into cell phones and tablets he's gonna force WinPhone on the desktop, which i predict will be the biggest failwhale since MSFT Bob, that's one, two you have the great XP dieoff giving you all these incredibly powerful machines that MSFT has priced themselves out of the running with, we are talking late P4s to early mid dual core desktops and laptops with 1gb+ of RAM and 40Gb+ of HDDs which is more than enough for Linux, and finally you have a population that NEVER BEFORE IN HISTORY does damned near everything online, the one place where Linux has always been strong!

      So what do you do? do you give all those businesses and consumers a distro with 10 years of updates so they can be confident they can just slap that OS on and it'll just work? Do you tell Linus to STFU and develop an ABI so the drivers won't break if they DO upgrade? Do you focus on stability and bug fixes and QA to make Linux so damned rock solid frankly no body has to do forum hunts of CLI fixes? NOPE, you throw out BOTH major DEs when they are FINALLY becoming really stable for a blingapaloza that sends you back a good 7 years on the stability front and just to add to the fail replace the sound which again was finally starting to get stable with Pulseaudio which is barely at MSFT first release quality, which is to say it sucks! Oh and if all that weren't bad enough Canonical the ones that were SUPPOSED to be the ones making the noob friendly distro for the masses says "Hey slapping a cell phone UI on the desktop is a GREAT idea, lets do that!" and makes their distro even more of a failwhale than Win 8, which is quite an accomplishment!

      I swear the current OS situation reminds me of that old Monty Python skit where the upper class twits couldn't even shoot themselves correctly because they were too fricking stupid and I'm not alone [] in feeling this way. hell even Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols who is the biggest linTroll and the flipside to the Thurott Wintroll hates the new UIs [] and for HIM to say anything nasty about Linux is unheard of!

      C'mon Linux community, you are better than this I know you are. its obvious the Linux devs are gonna ignore you unless you have a royal screaming shitfit so speak up already! We ALL know what's happening here, its as plain as the nose on your face, Apple released the iPhone and iPad and all the devs done lost their damned minds and are tripping all over themselves trying to come up with the "next iPad" and destroying their core strengths in the process. As someone who has been selling to consumers since before there even was a Windows i can tell you a few things about consumers and the desktop/laptop, 1.-Most of them have NO clue about all the bling bling crap you guys slap in there, and the few bits they know about they don't like. hell they were willing to put up with the Fisher price UI of XP right? all you need is to not make it fugly, maybe a nice metalli

  • BLECK! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by WolphFang ( 1077109 ) <> on Monday February 13, 2012 @11:15PM (#39028395) Homepage
    Awful desktop design. I *need* multiple windows displayed, *NOT* maximised to a single task view.... *LAMERZ*
    • Re:BLECK! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Shark ( 78448 ) on Tuesday February 14, 2012 @12:09AM (#39028783)

      I'm so with you on that one... May I add screen space being used for my work, not giant blank areas that serve no purpose, like 10 pixel padding around every single item or giant icons that a Parkingson's disease patient on speed could never miss. I could also do without the nagging sensation that I'm using a 24" smartphone that even Jobs would have labeled too dumbed down for the masses.

      There used to be a time when a larger monitor meant more information in front of you. I guess it's still true, only the information now is just blank spaces between inane UI elements. Were I still a kid, I'd feel like my parents took away my Lego Technic set to hand me a bucket of Duplo.

  • by poppopret ( 1740742 ) on Monday February 13, 2012 @11:19PM (#39028425)

    It takes just a minute to make XFCE look and act pretty much like GNOME 1.

    I think you can clone GNOME 2 as well, but I always configured that to be like GNOME 1 so quickly that I barely saw it. :-) Why you'd want bars at top AND bottom of the screen is a mystery to me, but XFCE does support it. The same goes for desktop icons: you can have it if you want it.

    I have my menu, my task switcher, my desktop switcher, my clock, and my xterm launcher. Life is good with XFCE.

  • I wait with baited breath for a hopefully usable system, unlike the current gnome shell, and most especially unlike unity. I want applications that remember their states and can be saved and restored (gconsole, I'm looking at you in particular) and otherwise the ability to organize my working day properly on desktop and laptop.
    Support tablet all you want, but don't remove support for desktop and laptop - like unity did.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 13, 2012 @11:24PM (#39028457)

    Things I like:

    - Look seems updated & clean (simple top menu bar)
    - Hidden dock (containing my favorite apps)
    - Hot corner (shows all running apps)
    - Instant app / file search

    Things I hate:

    - No minimize buttons
    - Hidden desktop icons
    - The bottom notification area
    - Needs better UI consistency behind the scenes (ex. System Settings looks unorganized and messy, etc...)
    - Consider putting any common app menu items in the top menu bar

    I do prefer it over Ubuntu's default UI and KDE so far...
    Just my two cents :)

    - stoops

    • by erroneus ( 253617 ) on Monday February 13, 2012 @11:45PM (#39028603) Homepage

      Let's not forget how badly incomplete it is even now. Perhaps there are better implementations under other OSes, but under Fedora, it's just missing SO MUCH. Screensavers? I can't change the window controls colors at all?! What the hell?

      The instant app search? C'mon. Just give me some menus. They really ARE faster. And seriously? Change the entire display over and over again to launch a single program?

      And the top menu bar is a horrible abonimation. I want to be able to change it with mouse clicks, not addon scriptlets which fight with other scriptlets.

      I'm on the second Fedora with Gnome3 and it hasn't improved a great deal. When I finally get around to upgrading my main laptop from F14, it's going to CentOS6. I might continue to play with Gnome3/F16 on my smaller, travel machine, but I just can't imagine my mind changing with regards to Gnome3. They just need to say "we're sorry... we'll put it back."

      So yeah.... even Linux can have a "WindowsME/Vista" thing happen... and here it is.

  • what about cinnamon? (Score:5, Informative)

    by lord3nd3r ( 1073580 ) on Monday February 13, 2012 @11:36PM (#39028549) Homepage Journal
    I for one, love cinnamon. [] :D
  • by erroneus ( 253617 ) on Monday February 13, 2012 @11:37PM (#39028557) Homepage

    Just when I thought I could maybe settle in with Gnome3 on my Fedora 16 running, 11" laptop, I read this and was reminded why I hated Gnome3.

    They go on about the efficiencies of maximized windows? REALLY? I'm not one of those users. I prefer overlapping windows so I can see movement in them when something changes. Yes, I know I can still do that, but tweaks are necessary.

    Another thing that's getting to me is the wild mouse movements required to navigate around. Go to one corner to change to the window changing mode, then go to the opposite corner to do something with the windows like move it to another virtual display or something. Did they consider what a pain that actually is for people with touchpads or those stupid keyboard joysticks? Worse, what does it mean for the disabled?

    It's not just different. It's different without a cause or a purpose. It's really stretching things to assert "an old person's user philosophy" where windows should always be maximized over others where people like to be able to easily and more quickly select and work with objects between windows. (Ain't much drag-n-drop with maximized windows is there?)

    Linus Torvald's words keep coming back to mind... "unholy abomination" I believe they were.

  • by FilthCatcher ( 531259 ) on Monday February 13, 2012 @11:47PM (#39028615) Homepage
    This particular rant is about Unity but the concept of "design" decision overriding utlity applies.

    I really tried using Unity for a week or so but NEEDED to move the launcher / dock thingy to a different screen edge. (reasons below)
    First, I tried the obvious click-dragging move - nothing happened
    Ok, I told myself. This is open source software! must be a config file somewhere so I googled. Found a post from Shuttleworth himself saying:

    I’m afraid the location of the Unity launcher is fixed by design. We want the launcher always close to the Ubuntu button.

    Fixed by design? but I want to move it! I'm running ubuntu inside Virtualbox. I NEED both 'dowze and 'nix and the windows host / linux guest config works best for me. I also give that Linux guest a monitor to itself - on the right. Because it's on the right, the left edge of the linux screen jumps the mouse pointer back to the left screen and into the windows host system. So when trying to use the dock with autohide on (i want to use all of my screen when coding) I'd keep touching the edge of the screen and the dock would disappear.
    I've got no problem with these design decisions from valuable end-user testing being used to setup defaults but both Gnome and unity seem hell-bent on FORCING you to use their new design paradigms and guess what? It just doesn't suit all use cases.

    This being open source, it didn't take long for a whole bunch of options, wokarounds and custom docks to appear but for fuck's sake stop telling me how to use MY computer.
    Am currently reasonably happy with KDE - Don't think I'll be going anywhere near Unity or Gnome for a very long time.

  • by Osgeld ( 1900440 ) on Monday February 13, 2012 @11:49PM (#39028625)

    If it breaks my way of operating a computer. Yes gnome3 is pretty, yes gnome3 does have some interesting idea's, yes gnome3 is a fucking pain in the ass and gets in the way all the damn time.

    I lasted a whole 3 months with it, then rolled back to gnome2, sure its ugly, sure it has its problems as well, but wow its like using a modern computer, not mac OS6, I can put shortcuts on my desktop without switching DM's, I can right click options that in gnome3 require 3rd party shit and editing a text file, I can make a pile of virtual desktops and not play mind games to get them to show up (like maximize 1 app so desktop2 shows then right click and move bullshit), and if my mouse happens to hit the corner of the screen the whole fucking thing doesnt insta break, zoom out, and require me to select something before I can get back to what I was doing (even windows7 got that right)

  • by whoever57 ( 658626 ) on Monday February 13, 2012 @11:57PM (#39028683) Journal

    Displaying multiple windows at the same time means that screen space isnâ(TM)t used efficiently, and it means that you donâ(TM)t get a focused view of what it is that you are interested in. Windows that arenâ(TM)t maximised also create additional tasks for people. Often you need to adjust their size, or you have to move them around.

    My work requires me to frequently copy and paste from one window to another, or to compare the contents of one window to another, or I switch to another task while I keep an eye on window waiting for a task to finish. A single maximized window would be horribly inefficient for me, not to mention a stupid waste of space (I have a 2 monitor setup -- there is only so much usable width in a broswer window).

    It's one thing to set the default to be optimized for maximized windows, but make it impossible for me to reconfigure it to work well with multiple windows and your window manager becomes useless for me.

  • Horrible. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Alex Belits ( 437 ) * on Monday February 13, 2012 @11:58PM (#39028685) Homepage

    This is absolutely horrible, and whoever came up with this thing, should resign from GNOME and go work for Google on Android-without-Java, because this is where it belongs.

  • by gumpish ( 682245 ) on Monday February 13, 2012 @11:58PM (#39028687) Journal

    Long live MATE [].

  • by schwep ( 173358 ) on Tuesday February 14, 2012 @12:04AM (#39028729)

    Hey, GNOME team - I really want to like & use your stuff. It looks neat. But - I earn my living with this 'user interface' each and every day. I don't spend the day playing music and splashing paint on brick walls wondering what bark is made of...

    I write code. Lots of code. I have 10-15 editor windows open on 2 or 3 desktops. I deal with 200 emails a day, while on conference calls with customers, while trying to 2 other things (usually poorly, but that's not the point). My computer life isn't as simple as opening 1 program.

    I need the ability to be productive all the time. Please, write up user-stories based on what your kernel developer friends needs. Look at what people like Linus need. Please help us!

  • by smpoole7 ( 1467717 ) on Tuesday February 14, 2012 @12:07AM (#39028759) Homepage

    Seems like a million years ago now that I left Windows 98 for Mandrake Linux running KDE 2. I was amazed at how good it was and how easily it installed. I still kept Windows around so that I could play games and deal with multimedia, but most of my work was done in Linux.

    Then came KDE 3. I liked it. Then came KDE 4. I hated it. I tried Gnome 2, got used to it and decided I liked it. Then Gnome 3 came along and I almost gave up.

    Instead of all of this "me, too!" stuff, and trying to emulate Android on the desktop, why not something really revolutionary? Here's just one example: most of us have lots of resolution and nice big monitors now. Why not a USEFUL 3D desktop? For example, opened windows can be scrolled into the background with the mouse wheel; just hover the wheel over it and a pop up reminds you what that particular window is, and if you want to bring it back to the foreground, scroll the mouse wheel the other way. Make it a true 3D desktop that lets me navigate through everything just like I'm strolling through a neighborhood.

    No, instead, we get windows that fade in and out (when they don't hang my system -- I had to turn Plasma off) and other *extremely* useful innovations.

    I've never understood. There are no rules, so why not just try something completely different? After all, one of the killer apps that made the original PC indispensable was a little program called Lotus 1 2 3 (showing my age now; for you kids, it was around LONG before Excel even existed).

    Linux has a very, very, VERY good kernel. It's about time that it had a really, really revolutionary desktop, one that doesn't copy anything else, or try to be anything else, but one that simply revolutionizes how we work on these bloomin' little thingies called "pee cees."

  • This is why I uninstalled the Gnome 3 desktop on my Ubuntu 12.04 system and I managed to get the MATE desktop installed instead. I do not want a glorified tablet interface on a desktop machine. Even the Afterstep and Enlightenment E16 interfaces are better than Gnome 3. Afterstep at least is based on a NextStep interface and has some sort of heritage. Gnome 3 is just stupid. Sure I am running a alpha release of Ubuntu, but this is Linux and I expect my software to work and not copy the tablet interface just because it is the trendy thing right now.

    The Gnome 1.0 interface [] was a simple interface, the Red Hat desktop kept this style of desktop for a while with the single panel on the bottom of the screen just like Windows `95, then they moved to the two panels, but you could still change it to look like Gnome 1.0. Nowadays the whole interface is crap.

  • by caseih ( 160668 ) on Tuesday February 14, 2012 @12:18AM (#39028827)

    I have a 24" screen. Why would I ever maximize a window other than, say a game or Google Earth? I have a "windowing" system for a reason. Fixed-width layouts on the web are common as well and on a large, high res screen you're going to have either a very large window with a lot of blank space, or a window with very zoomed-in text. Maybe they are catering to the ADHT-type people, but I run a Window Manager for a reason. I can kind of see where they are going (and apps aren't forced to be maximized), but I have some serious doubts.

  • by Alex Belits ( 437 ) * on Tuesday February 14, 2012 @12:51AM (#39029003) Homepage

    Seriously, same stupid reason for development (Comic Sans was made for MS Bob, if anyone forgot), same attempt to achieve the look of a different and hard to imitate medium (comic book font on a 800x600 bitmap, phone UI on a multi-monitor desktop), same failure, same amount of suffering inflicted on the unsuspecting users.

  • by necro351 ( 593591 ) on Tuesday February 14, 2012 @01:00AM (#39029055) Journal

    Window managers manage windows:

    I use GNOME 2 with Compiz and I'm very content. What are the killer features for me? Focus follows mouse, I can press Alt-click and drag windows by clicking anywhere, I can press Alt-middle-click and resize windows by almost clicking anywhere. I made a shortcut where if I press Alt+Ctrl+Shift+I it maximizes my window only vertically (great for terminals). One big killer feature with Compiz is an OS X-like Expose thing that lets me easily select windows, and shows me everything on my screen at once. What do all these awesome things have in common? They are all about managing windows, and nothing else, which is what a good window manager _should_ do. GNOME should keep going this way and not philosophize over what the default ought to be.

    How I use my terminal window(s) depends on what I'm doing (developing, debugging, scripting, writing LaTeX, etc...). I don't care if my web browser is maximized once the fonts are readable, it looks pretty, and I can see everything I need. What do all these things have in common? The window size is _not_ the problem, only the application and the user know how the window ought to be, and only the user knows how it ought to be relative to other windows. There is no good default. I used Chrome OS for a couple weeks and hated it. The window manager ought to manage windows and focus on that.

    GNOME 3 Gets Search and Beauty, Good:

    What GNOME 3 is getting right is bringing back 'Beagle' and extending it to do more stuff. I love Spotlight on OS X, it has made the Dock, the start menu, desktop shortcuts, the Launcher (in Lion), and all the rest of it obsolete. Spotlight is king, bow down to spotlight. GNOME 3 gets this, good. GNOME also gets that the UI needs to be pretty, its just depressing when its not. My Linux machine isn't as pretty as my OS X machine, and that makes me sad, there is no reason that has to be. GNOME gets this, good.

    GNOME 3's Direction:

    I guess GNOME 3 should keep making stuff prettier, definitely keep focusing on search, and make me a wizard-God when it comes to managing windows. I want to do Expose, I want to effortlessly save window configurations and have GNOME 3 remember them when I open up the same applications. I want to re-size, drag, tile, layer, focus-follow-mouse, and make my windows do back-flips, effortlessly. I want GNOME 3 to not presume to do anything by default, but listen to the application and me.

  • by gnu-sucks ( 561404 ) on Tuesday February 14, 2012 @01:01AM (#39029063) Journal

    I can't wait for a system where each application automatically takes up the entire screen!

    Just imagine, reading on my 30 inch screen, FULLY MAXIMIZED, so that no other applications can distract me. Or, if I decide to code, EACH terminal could span the entire desktop. No longer will I have to struggle with seeing two things at once -- from now on, it's peace of mind with GNOME 3.

    Thankfully I can now give gvim the space it has always deserved -- a fully uncluttered 2560 x 1600 space. And when I decide to listen to music, my music app can take up the entire space too! Imagine, seeing nothing but whitespace. Thank goodness someone thought of this. I can finally relax and do what I've always wanted to do: use my computer, one app at a time, in FULL SCREEN!

    If you think about it, this is almost as good as DOS. No more annoying window title bars and multi-app desktop usage. No more extra buttons and widgets. Just one thing and one thing only -- what you're going to work on. I can't wait to develop kernel drivers and work on my apps this way. The fact that when I currently work I can actually see (and be distracted by) about three to four windows at a time is just devastating. I have to (currently) *navigate* to each and every window, and precariously drag the window across my entire desktop to achieve this effect, only to remain haunted by menu bars, title bars, and application switchers.

    If only they could put a stop to all those pesky background processes and really get it down to just one single process. Then all the processes on my computer wouldn't have to compete for computer resources. Just like DOS, I'm telling you, I can't wait, we're getting back to the single-purpose one-thing-at-a-time operating system!

    Obligatory slashdot sayings:
    I for one welcome our maximized-app overlords!
    In Soviet-Russia, window manager maximizes YOU!
    One app to rule them all!
    It was as if millions of apps suddenly cried out in terror and were suddenly silenced, replaced with calming whitespace.

  • by ThorGod ( 456163 ) on Tuesday February 14, 2012 @01:16AM (#39029169) Journal

    From the article:

    Judging by the comments it would seem that there is a bit of confusion about what is meant by maximising windows by default, so let me try and clarify:

    1.) Not all applications will use this behaviour – only those that have been designed to do so. If an app won’t work being maximised, it won’t be.
    2.) Although these applications will maximise by default, it will still be possible to unmaximise them. If you want to be able to view more than one window at once you will still be able to do so.
    3.) There will be mechanisms put in place that will adjust the behaviour to compensate for large screens. We are currently investigating a number of options here, including not automatically maximising windows on these large screens or adjusting their layout to make best use of the extra space. Everyone involved is well aware of the need to work well with large screens!

    i.e. "Yeah, we know this wont work in every case, you ninnies who are going to nit pick at the corner cases like they're the only things that exist."

    I, for one, like gnome3. I use it when I reboot this machine and it works great.

  • by decora ( 1710862 ) on Tuesday February 14, 2012 @01:21AM (#39029211) Journal

    i think i will stick with it for 5 years if i have to.

  • by fahrbot-bot ( 874524 ) on Tuesday February 14, 2012 @02:15AM (#39029469)
    Sigh. While I understand that some may like this kind of thing and it may make sense in some circumstances. I have never - ever - run any application maximized in the 25+ years I've been working (or in college). Not on my Xerox 1108 Dandelion, Sun I (through present) workstations, SGI Indy, or any number of Unix graphical workstations or Windows/Linux/Unix PCs. With any sufficiently large display, running maximized is almost retarded. As a system programmer/admin, multiple windows are basically required to be efficient and effective. Just my well-worn $.02.
  • by cfalcon ( 779563 ) on Tuesday February 14, 2012 @02:39AM (#39029625)

    Haters like myself. I don't get why GNOME had to go the direction it did, but it's clearly not for the users they have. It's like they are designing for some ludicrous platonic ideal? Or something?

    Lemme just throw in with the "GNOME 3 sucks" crew. I hate it lots. It's like, what would come after GNOME 2? Well, apparently instead of adding stuff, they just substracted things, and made them suck, and then turned off all ability to customize without motherfucking recompiling it your fucking self. Such user hatred hasn't been seen in commercial software in a long time, and that hurts to say.

  • by tobiah ( 308208 ) on Tuesday February 14, 2012 @03:06AM (#39029771)

    Where's the love, KDE is unsinkable!

Marriage is the sole cause of divorce.