5 ms·

I've never had any issue with gnome 3 or unity or gnomeshell or whatever its called. I started out on linux with Slackware and windowmaker. It was beautiful! A

I've never had any issue with gnome 3 or unity or gnomeshell or whatever its called. I started out on linux with Slackware and windowmaker. It was beautiful! And fast! And copy and paste didn't work between applications. I grudgingly used kde for a while and GTK. I then went osx for a while, and when gnome 3 and unity came out it had all my favorite bits about osx without the clutter. I went online to find oodles of hate. I never have understood it.

pessimizer 4y ago
I've met people who loved Windows 8. Different strokes.
- hermitdev 4y ago
  There were things I loved about Windows 8 over 7. The UI, however, was not one of them. For me, the killer feature for 8 over 7 or earlier was HyperV. Having local easily usable VMs was awesome. Now, with WSL 2, my need for HyperV has diminished, but it's still useful at times. HyperV was far more usable to me than VirtualBox. I'll admit I never tried VMware workstation, but I also wasn't going to pay what they were asking (at the time).
  - pjmlp 4y ago
    WSL 2 runs on top of Hyper-V.
Nursie 4y ago
> I went online to find oodles of hate. I never have understood it. You update your workstation one day to find the distro put a new UI on it. OK, this is interesting but you need to get on with some work, so you just switch back to the old one. That option's gone. Hmm, OK well let's have a quick play with this new thing... Wait, you can't move anything around to where you're used to? WTF. And there are whole different window-interaction paradigms, odd choices about workspaces over window manipulation. Huh... well at least you can still run the programs you need to. Wait, why isn't the messenger app you need for work appearing in the notification area? What is that in the notification area? A different app that you can't remove, don't need and with no way to replace it? WTF. OK you really do need to go back to the old version. But the distro repos don't even have it, so you can't even install it. WTF? Is it just gone? You were just using that yesterday! You go online to investigate and find out there's been this major update, some distros have switched to it already, and it seems like it was a deliberate choice to make it impossible to run the old thing alongside. The old thing is now abandonware, instantly, and if you want to work the way you have been for the last ten years, you're wrong, old fashioned, out of date, stifling open source and generally a problem. Wow OK. Does that explain it OK? I'm not saying the vitriol online is all justified, but this is how a lot of us first encountered Gnome 3/Shell. Personally at that point I'd already been using Xfce on a low-powered machine, so I just switched over, and within a couple of minutes I had my desktop back how I like it, and got on with my life. But I'll always remember that at some point the Gnome folks (and the distros share some blame) actively ripped away my way of working, and told me I was a dick for not thanking them for it.
- galangalalgol 4y ago
  Ok, yeah that would upset me as well. People always just complained about aspects of it and I was thinking of it in regards to home use. My workplace stuck with an ancient rhel version for at least a few years after I had gnome 3 at home. So even if I hadn't been used to the osx ui and doing everything from the cli from Slackware, I wouldn't have had the "I just need to get this work done!" Because I'd been exposed for years before it was my work environment, at which point I welcomed it. Your introduction and your reaction make perfect sense.
- bombela 4y ago
  That's exactly what happened for me as well. Except I went with i3 (window manager) + Mate (gnome 2 fork) for the desktop utilities. Overtime the stupid choices of gtk3 are getting on my nerves more and more. Now I have to patch the crap just to be able to navigate in the file browser by typing the begining of filenames (the default now starts a laggy and buggy file search. they removed the old code).
- Crysstalis 4y ago
  >Does that explain it OK? No. The things you are saying are completely normal and expected, and I cannot see why you would be upset by that if you had been updating a Linux system (or any OS) for the years prior to that. Every OS has changed their UI, some have done it several times. Remember the initial switch to Windows 8, or MacOS X, or from GNOME 1 to GNOME 2? And even before that, how Linux distributions had frequently been switching between window managers or from GNOME to KDE and vice versa? It makes no sense to me to take issue with this one specific case. For a project that is trying to keep attracting new users, it is unreasonable to expect them to never change anything or never refactor the UI. The real WTF is using something like XFCE and expecting nothing to change for 20 or more years, that is totally out of the ordinary with any comparable retail tech product.
  - Nursie 4y ago
    > No. The things you are saying are completely normal and expected They really aren't. > Remember the initial switch to Windows 8 Yes, it was terrible, people hated the change and that it was hard to make it work like the older versions, it's still famous for being horrible and unusable and MS basically rolled it back in the face of overwhelming criticism. (Windows 8 is actually a really good point of comparison here, I never claimed that only the gnome people have done this) > Linux distributions had frequently been switching between window managers or from GNOME to KDE and vice versa Yep, and you could always switch back and forth, easily. Gnome 3 was scorched earth. > The real WTF is using something like XFCE and expecting nothing to change for 20 or more years Yet here I am, and here most people on Windows are, and on OS X. MacOS X from 2001 is still recognisable today. Move the start button on Windows 11 to the left and you've basically got an evolved Win 95/NT 4. Evolutionary changes and improvements are great. People choosing to work differently is great. Designers exploring different ways of working, great. Wading in and hamfistedly breaking everything about how people work, then telling them they're wrong for wanting to keep working that way, is virtually never well received.

pessimizer 4y ago

I've met people who loved Windows 8. Different strokes.

hermitdev 4y ago
There were things I loved about Windows 8 over 7. The UI, however, was not one of them. For me, the killer feature for 8 over 7 or earlier was HyperV. Having local easily usable VMs was awesome. Now, with WSL 2, my need for HyperV has diminished, but it's still useful at times. HyperV was far more usable to me than VirtualBox. I'll admit I never tried VMware workstation, but I also wasn't going to pay what they were asking (at the time).
- pjmlp 4y ago
  WSL 2 runs on top of Hyper-V.

Nursie 4y ago

> I went online to find oodles of hate. I never have understood it. You update your workstation one day to find the distro put a new UI on it. OK, this is interesting but you need to get on with some work, so you just switch back to the old one. That option's gone. Hmm, OK well let's have a quick play with this new thing... Wait, you can't move anything around to where you're used to? WTF. And there are whole different window-interaction paradigms, odd choices about workspaces over window manipulation. Huh... well at least you can still run the programs you need to. Wait, why isn't the messenger app you need for work appearing in the notification area? What is that in the notification area? A different app that you can't remove, don't need and with no way to replace it? WTF. OK you really do need to go back to the old version. But the distro repos don't even have it, so you can't even install it. WTF? Is it just gone? You were just using that yesterday! You go online to investigate and find out there's been this major update, some distros have switched to it already, and it seems like it was a deliberate choice to make it impossible to run the old thing alongside. The old thing is now abandonware, instantly, and if you want to work the way you have been for the last ten years, you're wrong, old fashioned, out of date, stifling open source and generally a problem. Wow OK. Does that explain it OK? I'm not saying the vitriol online is all justified, but this is how a lot of us first encountered Gnome 3/Shell. Personally at that point I'd already been using Xfce on a low-powered machine, so I just switched over, and within a couple of minutes I had my desktop back how I like it, and got on with my life. But I'll always remember that at some point the Gnome folks (and the distros share some blame) actively ripped away my way of working, and told me I was a dick for not thanking them for it.

galangalalgol 4y ago
Ok, yeah that would upset me as well. People always just complained about aspects of it and I was thinking of it in regards to home use. My workplace stuck with an ancient rhel version for at least a few years after I had gnome 3 at home. So even if I hadn't been used to the osx ui and doing everything from the cli from Slackware, I wouldn't have had the "I just need to get this work done!" Because I'd been exposed for years before it was my work environment, at which point I welcomed it. Your introduction and your reaction make perfect sense.
bombela 4y ago
That's exactly what happened for me as well. Except I went with i3 (window manager) + Mate (gnome 2 fork) for the desktop utilities. Overtime the stupid choices of gtk3 are getting on my nerves more and more. Now I have to patch the crap just to be able to navigate in the file browser by typing the begining of filenames (the default now starts a laggy and buggy file search. they removed the old code).
Crysstalis 4y ago
>Does that explain it OK? No. The things you are saying are completely normal and expected, and I cannot see why you would be upset by that if you had been updating a Linux system (or any OS) for the years prior to that. Every OS has changed their UI, some have done it several times. Remember the initial switch to Windows 8, or MacOS X, or from GNOME 1 to GNOME 2? And even before that, how Linux distributions had frequently been switching between window managers or from GNOME to KDE and vice versa? It makes no sense to me to take issue with this one specific case. For a project that is trying to keep attracting new users, it is unreasonable to expect them to never change anything or never refactor the UI. The real WTF is using something like XFCE and expecting nothing to change for 20 or more years, that is totally out of the ordinary with any comparable retail tech product.
- Nursie 4y ago
  > No. The things you are saying are completely normal and expected They really aren't. > Remember the initial switch to Windows 8 Yes, it was terrible, people hated the change and that it was hard to make it work like the older versions, it's still famous for being horrible and unusable and MS basically rolled it back in the face of overwhelming criticism. (Windows 8 is actually a really good point of comparison here, I never claimed that only the gnome people have done this) > Linux distributions had frequently been switching between window managers or from GNOME to KDE and vice versa Yep, and you could always switch back and forth, easily. Gnome 3 was scorched earth. > The real WTF is using something like XFCE and expecting nothing to change for 20 or more years Yet here I am, and here most people on Windows are, and on OS X. MacOS X from 2001 is still recognisable today. Move the start button on Windows 11 to the left and you've basically got an evolved Win 95/NT 4. Evolutionary changes and improvements are great. People choosing to work differently is great. Designers exploring different ways of working, great. Wading in and hamfistedly breaking everything about how people work, then telling them they're wrong for wanting to keep working that way, is virtually never well received.