4 ms·
It didn't die; somehow it changed direction hard enough to lose significant developer capacity. I liken it to the total failure of the Flickr rewrite. Flickr c
by dleslie 7y ago
It didn't die; somehow it changed direction hard enough to lose significant developer capacity.
I liken it to the total failure of the Flickr rewrite. Flickr could have been Facebook!
So... How did that happen? Who was responsible for setting Gnome dev back by half a decade?
- BearOso 7y agoI still hold that they should’ve renamed GNOME 3 something other than GNOME and let each develop as their own things. I feel like that method would’ve hemorrhaged fewer developers. Clearly there was some sort of closed meeting at Redhat with the few people that inherited leadership of GNOME deciding on the complete overhaul; it wasn’t a democratic process. GNOME 3 is performing well enough now that I have moved over to it. At its introduction, though, it forced compositing, and drivers were not ready. That coupled with the massive UI changes gave users good reasons to complain.
- dleslie 7y agoIt cannot run on most ARM SBCs; I can't run it with any reasonable consistent responsiveness on any but my newest PC. Gnome 3 is _still_ a pig; and utterly useless to most of the world which still operates on half decade or decade old PCs. It's a prime example of privileged western developers overlooking the needs of their users.
- anthk 7y agoI live in a Western country and Gnome3 is still a pig on low end 4GB RAM based machines. Budgie is much faster.