3 ms·

For the most part I've become comfortable with the UI in Gnome 3, but I mostly avoid it. They've done a lot to fix the initial problems that the interface had

by Twirrim 10y ago

For the most part I've become comfortable with the UI in Gnome 3, but I mostly avoid it. They've done a lot to fix the initial problems that the interface had, and I think they've got to a good place for the most part. Try and switch to Gnome 2 / MATE for a little bit and see the drastic improvements in responsiveness, though. That's what kills gnome 3 for me. Even on a nice high spec machine I still end up conscious of the UI latency, and that's really not a good position to be in. The UI needs to get out of the way, and a key part of that is being fast.

DCKing 10y ago
I agree, that's why I use the Impatience extension [1]! I don't use anything GTK2 based any more as the lack of smooth scrolling support is really jarring for me, despite the fact that I still like Gnome2's basic design. [1]: https://extensions.gnome.org/extension/277/impatience/ https://extensions.gnome.org/extension/277/impatience/
- Twirrim 10y ago
  Nice. I'll give that a shot.
- pcr0 10y ago
  I'm not sure what you were referring to with GTK2, but MATE uses GTK3 and preserves the Gnome 2 look.
  - DCKing 10y ago
    Didn't know they migrated already, good on them!
bwat49 10y ago
Yeah, the UI latency/smoothness is my one main issue with gnome 3. If it wasn't for that I'd be the biggest gnome 3 fanboy around. I think the shell being written in javascript was a double-edged sword. The extensibility is really cool, but the performance is borderline unacceptable.