6 ms·

I understand how hard it is to improve an open source software to get to be on the same level of proprietary ones, but it seems that Gnome took multiple steps b

by sharno 7y ago

I understand how hard it is to improve an open source software to get to be on the same level of proprietary ones, but it seems that Gnome took multiple steps backwards, or rather maybe the ubuntu adaptation of it. I saw multiple UX hiccups and small missing functionalities that makes me wonder when would a DE reach the full maturity to stay as it is with small improvements and doing what's intended to be done. For the time being I think KDE is a more stable and functional DE than Gnome, hope Gnome returns to its glorious days soon though.

cheald 7y ago
I love modern KDE. I've been running Kubuntu for the last year or so and just adore it.
pas 7y ago
I can understand that GNOME wanted to migrate off of C for the non-core things, so they cut down features. Now if you need something you can write a plugin in JS. It has advantages, and of course disadvantages too. (The expressiveness of the plugin API is naturally lacking compared to possibilities of built-in features, but with time that can/will change.)
- Lorkki 7y ago
  Right now the main disadvantage is that GNOME Shell is single-threaded, and handles not only those JS extensions, but also essential tasks like window compositing. This means that a misbehaving extension can freeze the whole desktop, which is especially bad on Wayland where that includes the mouse cursor and input processing. I still prefer GNOME for the rest of its UX, but if you ask me, the next rewrite can't happen too soon. Edit: I noticed that some of the new improvements seem to be addressing just this, so what I'm saying may be out of date in regards to the latest version.
hathawsh 7y ago
I understand why Ubuntu doesn't switch the default to KDE; there's too much history and people would recoil at such a big change. That said, I always run Kubuntu rather than the default Ubuntu desktop and I'm really happy with it. Switching to KDE is almost as smooth as it can possibly be: once I have Ubuntu installed, all I have to do is "sudo apt-get install kubuntu-desktop" and then choose KDE at login. Some of the reasons I really like KDE: * I have keyboard shortcuts for switching desktops; I feel much more productive with 9 easily accessible virtual desktops. I use the "windows" key, sometimes called "meta": meta-Q, meta-W, meta-E, meta-A, etc. * I've added rules for automatically changing the window title bar colors to make it easier to distinguish between very similar-looking windows. My Sublime Text windows in particular have a different bar color for each project. Sometimes I have as many as 4 projects open at once. * I can lay out and enhance my screen any way I like. KDE doesn't quibble and even encourages it.
- Y_Y 7y ago
  For anyone like me who loved KDE 3 and then was profoundly disappointed by the big changes and rewrites in 4, I have to say KDE 5 is back to being brilliant. It's also the only desktop I know with a Fuzzy Clock that can be set to "accuracy=halfling" so you know when second breakfast has turned into elevenses. It hadn't occured to me until now to try going back to kubuntu though (having been on Arch since KDE4).
  - tkdc926 7y ago
    Try Manjaro. Based on Arch with KDE Plasma desktop. It's awesome.
    - Y_Y 7y ago
      Thanks. I'm currently using Antergos, which I understand is roughly the same thing, with the difference being whether or not you use Arch's repos.
- emerongi 7y ago
  KDE is honestly amazing. My environment is exactly they way I want it, every shortcut does exactly what I want. I used Gnome before it for a while. I remember writing extensions for it and fixing other people's extensions. I remember logging in to some crash message every day, possibly because of the idiotic way extensions work: they just monkeypatch the actual DE code (?!?!??!) KDE provides all the functionality that I need without extensions. Nothing crashes, ever. I think Gnome is fine for people that are OK with default settings. For anyone that needs more, Gnome just doesn't suffice.
- mixmastamyk 7y ago
  KDE was always brilliant in functionality, but unprofessional looking. I've settled on Mate, but it could use some more KDE-style functionality.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
mrweasel 7y ago
Most if this reads more like a "What new in Gnome". Well I don't like Gnome. If I don't plan on using Gnome, it because very hard to tell if I can use most of the new Ubuntu feature, or if they are essentially Gnome features.
symlinkk 7y ago
Do you have specific examples?
jug 7y ago
Funny, I'm thinking the opposite about Gnome. That, much thanks to Canonical, it is finally getting much needed optimizations for better performance. I'd agree more with you 3-4 years ago than today. I'm also happy they finally stopped holding back Nautilus just because of the desktop icons... They should have just used a Gnome extension like now for that all along. All in all, I'm pretty happy with the performance of Ubuntu 19.04 and have enjoyed working with it since the beta. With the OpenWeather and Dash to Dock extensions, I find myself pretty much set with a nice looking desktop.
- audidude 7y ago
  It's nice that you give credit liberally, but most of the performance work you mention was done by Endless and Red Hat desktop teams.
pfranz 7y ago
From a UX perspective I haven't really seen much of an issue with KDE/Gnome in the past 15-20 years. The problem to me has been consistency (this app uses GTK so it behaves like this or you have to install it this way because it uses apt instead of rpm), administration, and support for apps/games you want to run. The few dealbreakers (GPU, Wifi, trackpad, power management support) weren't related to "the desktop" outside of multi-monitor or hidpi support. I had a few non-technical people use Linux in the early 2000s and loved it. My public library at the time was running Linux for their Book Catalog (on much older hardware than Windows would support). In general Linux Desktops were all reimplementations of Window's UI concepts (Desktop, Launcher Menu, Task Bar, Status Bar, etc). It seems like Gnome's game plan was to intentionally remove a bunch of stuff for the sake of simplification. Then Linux Desktops actually started innovating (macOS style app launcher, fast search to launch, ditching status bar and desktop). Windows seems to have made their own UX missteps as well.

by sharno 7y ago

cheald 7y ago

I love modern KDE. I've been running Kubuntu for the last year or so and just adore it.

pas 7y ago

I can understand that GNOME wanted to migrate off of C for the non-core things, so they cut down features. Now if you need something you can write a plugin in JS. It has advantages, and of course disadvantages too. (The expressiveness of the plugin API is naturally lacking compared to possibilities of built-in features, but with time that can/will change.)

Lorkki 7y ago
Right now the main disadvantage is that GNOME Shell is single-threaded, and handles not only those JS extensions, but also essential tasks like window compositing. This means that a misbehaving extension can freeze the whole desktop, which is especially bad on Wayland where that includes the mouse cursor and input processing. I still prefer GNOME for the rest of its UX, but if you ask me, the next rewrite can't happen too soon. Edit: I noticed that some of the new improvements seem to be addressing just this, so what I'm saying may be out of date in regards to the latest version.

hathawsh 7y ago

I understand why Ubuntu doesn't switch the default to KDE; there's too much history and people would recoil at such a big change. That said, I always run Kubuntu rather than the default Ubuntu desktop and I'm really happy with it. Switching to KDE is almost as smooth as it can possibly be: once I have Ubuntu installed, all I have to do is "sudo apt-get install kubuntu-desktop" and then choose KDE at login. Some of the reasons I really like KDE: * I have keyboard shortcuts for switching desktops; I feel much more productive with 9 easily accessible virtual desktops. I use the "windows" key, sometimes called "meta": meta-Q, meta-W, meta-E, meta-A, etc. * I've added rules for automatically changing the window title bar colors to make it easier to distinguish between very similar-looking windows. My Sublime Text windows in particular have a different bar color for each project. Sometimes I have as many as 4 projects open at once. * I can lay out and enhance my screen any way I like. KDE doesn't quibble and even encourages it.

Y_Y 7y ago
For anyone like me who loved KDE 3 and then was profoundly disappointed by the big changes and rewrites in 4, I have to say KDE 5 is back to being brilliant. It's also the only desktop I know with a Fuzzy Clock that can be set to "accuracy=halfling" so you know when second breakfast has turned into elevenses. It hadn't occured to me until now to try going back to kubuntu though (having been on Arch since KDE4).
- tkdc926 7y ago
  Try Manjaro. Based on Arch with KDE Plasma desktop. It's awesome.
  - Y_Y 7y ago
    Thanks. I'm currently using Antergos, which I understand is roughly the same thing, with the difference being whether or not you use Arch's repos.
emerongi 7y ago
KDE is honestly amazing. My environment is exactly they way I want it, every shortcut does exactly what I want. I used Gnome before it for a while. I remember writing extensions for it and fixing other people's extensions. I remember logging in to some crash message every day, possibly because of the idiotic way extensions work: they just monkeypatch the actual DE code (?!?!??!) KDE provides all the functionality that I need without extensions. Nothing crashes, ever. I think Gnome is fine for people that are OK with default settings. For anyone that needs more, Gnome just doesn't suffice.
mixmastamyk 7y ago
KDE was always brilliant in functionality, but unprofessional looking. I've settled on Mate, but it could use some more KDE-style functionality.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]

mrweasel 7y ago

Most if this reads more like a "What new in Gnome". Well I don't like Gnome. If I don't plan on using Gnome, it because very hard to tell if I can use most of the new Ubuntu feature, or if they are essentially Gnome features.

symlinkk 7y ago

Do you have specific examples?

jug 7y ago

Funny, I'm thinking the opposite about Gnome. That, much thanks to Canonical, it is finally getting much needed optimizations for better performance. I'd agree more with you 3-4 years ago than today. I'm also happy they finally stopped holding back Nautilus just because of the desktop icons... They should have just used a Gnome extension like now for that all along. All in all, I'm pretty happy with the performance of Ubuntu 19.04 and have enjoyed working with it since the beta. With the OpenWeather and Dash to Dock extensions, I find myself pretty much set with a nice looking desktop.

audidude 7y ago
It's nice that you give credit liberally, but most of the performance work you mention was done by Endless and Red Hat desktop teams.

pfranz 7y ago

From a UX perspective I haven't really seen much of an issue with KDE/Gnome in the past 15-20 years. The problem to me has been consistency (this app uses GTK so it behaves like this or you have to install it this way because it uses apt instead of rpm), administration, and support for apps/games you want to run. The few dealbreakers (GPU, Wifi, trackpad, power management support) weren't related to "the desktop" outside of multi-monitor or hidpi support. I had a few non-technical people use Linux in the early 2000s and loved it. My public library at the time was running Linux for their Book Catalog (on much older hardware than Windows would support). In general Linux Desktops were all reimplementations of Window's UI concepts (Desktop, Launcher Menu, Task Bar, Status Bar, etc). It seems like Gnome's game plan was to intentionally remove a bunch of stuff for the sake of simplification. Then Linux Desktops actually started innovating (macOS style app launcher, fast search to launch, ditching status bar and desktop). Windows seems to have made their own UX missteps as well.