There are few things that truly exemplify quality; I count the simple but not minimalist visual aesthetic of GNOME 2 as one of them. It is unfortunate that the

There are few things that truly exemplify quality; I count the simple but not minimalist visual aesthetic of GNOME 2 as one of them. It is unfortunate that they changed the aesthetic so much with GNOME 3, particularly making it more minimalist. I prefer the prevailing toolbar aesthetic in GNOME 2 of icons with text, and the less integrated desktop management scheme at a high level in comparison respect to the Shell. Even if the old toolbar style wasted space and the new desktop scheme provides more power, they destroyed the configurable simplicity of GNOME 2 in favor of minimalism. In addition, you have to respect the history of a product's UI if you wish to retain users who want to stay comfortable in the software they use.