7 ms·

I used to complain a lot about Gnome and the big changes they made. I still don't love some of their decisions, but it has become simple to use for the masses,

by xedrac 4y ago

I used to complain a lot about Gnome and the big changes they made. I still don't love some of their decisions, but it has become simple to use for the masses, and I consider that a win for Desktop Linux adoption.

Avshalom 4y ago
>it has become simple to use for the masses Was it not before? is it actually now? have the masses noticed?
- hot_gril 4y ago
  No. I use Linux on headless servers all the time, and even I don't mess with Linux DEs. The mere fact that there's more than one widely used is undesirable, and even a popular one like GNOME changed way too drastically (2 to 3). Last time I bothered with all this was GNOME 2 before 3 existed, which was ok at the time. The real Linux DE for the masses is ChromeOS, but people don't usually bucket it with the others. And that is Google's way or the highway.
  - lordgroff 4y ago
    This never made sense to me. Why is it bad there's several, especially at the current level of maturity, where both GNOME and KDE are perfectly viable options.
    - hot_gril 4y ago
      More moving parts when something goes wrong, which it will. You don't have to specify that you're using "macOS Ventura with the Glendale desktop environment and Hwy 101 window server" or something. Win2000 help might even be relevant in Win10 cause they prioritized familiarity. Even at my job where gurus are managing our workstations full-time, Linux users randomly had to all switch desktop environments cause of X dependency getting too old, and the new one partially broke compatibility with our remote desktop. It's not a perfectly layered cake. I also don't believe that people's use cases are really so different that there need to be so multiple widely-used Linux DEs. I'd get it if there were GNOME for almost everyone then other niche DEs for the rest. Again, so many people with a variety of use cases have managed ok with the basically unchanging Windows UI for decades.
      - kaba0 4y ago
        This is inherent in Cathedral vs Bazaar style of development though.. so, deal with it I guess?
        hot_gril 4y ago
        What I'm saying is most people don't deal with it.
- renewedrebecca 4y ago
  The masses will never notice because Linux is simply irrelevant to them unless it's on their routers or something.
toast0 4y ago
I didn't like it either, but I have accepted that just as Raku isn't the future of Perl 5, GNOME isn't the future of MATE. It's just the name changes were a little different.
cypress66 4y ago
> it has become simple to use for the masses, and I consider that a win for Desktop Linux adoption. Is that thanks to their decisions, or despite their decisions?
- xedrac 4y ago
  I installed Fedora 37 on a relative's laptop yesterday, because their Windows install was in shambles. He is completely computer illiterate. But the fact that it resembled his phone somewhat, instantly made it easier for him to use. Gnome2 would have been more challenging.
quanticle 4y ago
The fundamental problem with Gnome is that it presumes that "the masses" (however defined) will use a GNU/Linux desktop. They will not. Insofar as the masses use Linux on the desktop it will be in the form of ChromeOS (or something like it). Instead of chasing Windows and MacOS's taillights, and infantilizing its desktop by continuing to remove features, Gnome should have continued with the Gnome 2 philosophy of focusing on power users, with an emphasis on stability and backwards compatibility. Instead, what we've ended up with is a Gnome desktop that has all of the customizability of MacOS, but with defaults that are nonsensical rather than (somewhat) thought out. And yes, I'm aware that I can change a lot of Gnome with Gnome Tweak Tool and various extensions. But the fact that I have to install a third party tool, a browser extension, and then some extensions off a random website to get the same functionality that other desktop environments (such as KDE, MacOS and Windows) include by default is an absolute indictment of Gnome's design philosophy. Instead of chasing after users who have never heard of Gnome, and barely know about Linux, Gnome should have focused on improving the experience existing users. They still can. A good start would be taking all the settings that Gnome Tweak Tool exposes and bringing them back into the main settings UI, so that I don't have swap between two settings applications, with no rhyme or reason dictating how settings are split between the two. Also, please give me the ability to hide the clock (like I can do in Windows 10) without having to install some random extension [1] to do so. [1]: https://extensions.gnome.org/extension/1110/hide-clock/ https://extensions.gnome.org/extension/1110/hide-clock/
- JimBlackwood 4y ago
  What can GNOME do to still chase after power users? I genuinely don’t see what it has to add to powerusers. There’s great window managers and CLI/TUI tools, is there anything GNOME could offer for non-beginners that’s not already done better?
  - ndiddy 4y ago
    Unless KDE has significantly changed in the last few months, GNOME is the only DE that supports multiple monitors with different DPIs.
pxmpxm 4y ago
> it has become simple to use for the masses It has? I use gnome bits daily and it's a mess of inconsistent and zero-ux-background-so-i-came-up-with-my-own paradigms. There's no reason why the gterminal, for example, should replace the top most item in the right click menu with hex/oct representation of a number you happen to have selected, or every gnome app keeping affordances in "fun" new places: Compare gedit vs gnome-weather vs gnote vs gcontacts - sometimes there's a hamburger menu, other times there's contextual stuff under an icon, or a button, or a button with a contextual menu. Variety is the spice of life, right? If you're crushing it usability, you certainly can gloat about my way or the highway type of philosophy, but gnome is in no danger of that.
- jeroenhd 4y ago
  > There's no reason why the gterminal, for example, should replace the top most item in the right click menu with hex/oct representation of a number you happen to have selected I like it. It's useful during programming and it never gets in the way of anything. If you're going minimalist, why even use the right click menu at all? > Compare gedit vs gnome-weather vs gnote vs gcontacts - sometimes there's a hamburger menu, other times there's contextual stuff under an icon, or a button, or a button with a contextual menu. Variety is the spice of life, right? Most options with descriptions are behind the kebab menu on every app, quick controls are icon buttons. It all looks pretty consistent to me. gedit's open/save buttons are a bit weird, I suppose, but if that's all then I don't see the problem, really. You'll find inconsistencies like these on every OS. KDE has its fair share of wonkiness as well if you switch. Even Windows, the most popular operating system in the world, has a range of hamburger menu icons and placements.
- tristan957 4y ago
  You seem pretty out of date on your opinion. gedit is not in GNOME anymore. GNOME Weather is definitely consistent with the test of the desktop since people did a lot of porting in 42 and 43 to implement designs. GNote is not even a core GNOME application. GNOME Contacts is probably under maintained, but I'm sure if you see design issues, you would bring them up on the issue tracker instead of rambling in a HN comment.
midoridensha 4y ago
"The masses" don't use Linux. They use Windows, Mac, or their phone, or even Chromebooks. The only people using desktop Linux these days are Linux fans, or software developers who need it for work.
- taffer 4y ago
  Or people who work at government agencies that are forced to use open source software. Or schools or universities or hospitals. Some users have disabilities and accessibility is a requirement.
  - midoridensha 4y ago
    I'm not aware of schools, universities, or hospitals using Linux/Gnome. I've heard of it for some US Government systems, where they seem wedded to Red Hat. All the medical computers I've ever seen are running Windows. Maybe RH has a bunch of institutional customers I'm completely unaware of, but as far as I can tell, the Gnome devs seem to be trying to build a GUI aimed at mythological users: non-technical users they somehow think are going to switch to Linux Real Soon Now if only they can entice them with their holy ultra-simplified GUI. The real world doesn't work this way.
    - QUrprUd1nCeicw 4y ago
      That user isn't mythical. I'm a developer and I like GNOME's simplifications. I prefer to spend less time messing about with my window manager and more time actually, you know, developing. If you ask me, the idea that technical people need to spend months hacking around their desktop and fighting with thousands of mutually incompatible config settings just to get it to work is a harmful stereotype perpetuated by the more toxic aspects of the Linux community.
      - traverseda 4y ago
        KDE works fine out of the box and can be customized. It's what I use on my grandparents computer.
Gigachad 4y ago
Gnome complaining seems to be most common from people who spend all day tweaking window border radii and task bar widgets. Some of us have actual work to get done and don't want to play the role of UI designer. I trust that the Gnome people put the work in and get something that's mostly right.
- traverseda 4y ago
  I use kde with the default theme, but was quite happy with Gnome 2. Honestly most of my complaints aren't about gnome, gnome can do what it wants, they're about gtk apps (like Firefox) that are forced to adopt to terrible gnome conventions just because they use gtk. For example gnomes Terri terrible file picker.

by xedrac 4y ago

Avshalom 4y ago

>it has become simple to use for the masses Was it not before? is it actually now? have the masses noticed?

hot_gril 4y ago
No. I use Linux on headless servers all the time, and even I don't mess with Linux DEs. The mere fact that there's more than one widely used is undesirable, and even a popular one like GNOME changed way too drastically (2 to 3). Last time I bothered with all this was GNOME 2 before 3 existed, which was ok at the time. The real Linux DE for the masses is ChromeOS, but people don't usually bucket it with the others. And that is Google's way or the highway.
- lordgroff 4y ago
  This never made sense to me. Why is it bad there's several, especially at the current level of maturity, where both GNOME and KDE are perfectly viable options.
  - hot_gril 4y ago
    More moving parts when something goes wrong, which it will. You don't have to specify that you're using "macOS Ventura with the Glendale desktop environment and Hwy 101 window server" or something. Win2000 help might even be relevant in Win10 cause they prioritized familiarity. Even at my job where gurus are managing our workstations full-time, Linux users randomly had to all switch desktop environments cause of X dependency getting too old, and the new one partially broke compatibility with our remote desktop. It's not a perfectly layered cake. I also don't believe that people's use cases are really so different that there need to be so multiple widely-used Linux DEs. I'd get it if there were GNOME for almost everyone then other niche DEs for the rest. Again, so many people with a variety of use cases have managed ok with the basically unchanging Windows UI for decades.
    - kaba0 4y ago
      This is inherent in Cathedral vs Bazaar style of development though.. so, deal with it I guess?
      - hot_gril 4y ago
        What I'm saying is most people don't deal with it.
renewedrebecca 4y ago
The masses will never notice because Linux is simply irrelevant to them unless it's on their routers or something.

toast0 4y ago

I didn't like it either, but I have accepted that just as Raku isn't the future of Perl 5, GNOME isn't the future of MATE. It's just the name changes were a little different.

cypress66 4y ago

> it has become simple to use for the masses, and I consider that a win for Desktop Linux adoption. Is that thanks to their decisions, or despite their decisions?

xedrac 4y ago
I installed Fedora 37 on a relative's laptop yesterday, because their Windows install was in shambles. He is completely computer illiterate. But the fact that it resembled his phone somewhat, instantly made it easier for him to use. Gnome2 would have been more challenging.

quanticle 4y ago

The fundamental problem with Gnome is that it presumes that "the masses" (however defined) will use a GNU/Linux desktop. They will not. Insofar as the masses use Linux on the desktop it will be in the form of ChromeOS (or something like it). Instead of chasing Windows and MacOS's taillights, and infantilizing its desktop by continuing to remove features, Gnome should have continued with the Gnome 2 philosophy of focusing on power users, with an emphasis on stability and backwards compatibility. Instead, what we've ended up with is a Gnome desktop that has all of the customizability of MacOS, but with defaults that are nonsensical rather than (somewhat) thought out. And yes, I'm aware that I can change a lot of Gnome with Gnome Tweak Tool and various extensions. But the fact that I have to install a third party tool, a browser extension, and then some extensions off a random website to get the same functionality that other desktop environments (such as KDE, MacOS and Windows) include by default is an absolute indictment of Gnome's design philosophy. Instead of chasing after users who have never heard of Gnome, and barely know about Linux, Gnome should have focused on improving the experience existing users. They still can. A good start would be taking all the settings that Gnome Tweak Tool exposes and bringing them back into the main settings UI, so that I don't have swap between two settings applications, with no rhyme or reason dictating how settings are split between the two. Also, please give me the ability to hide the clock (like I can do in Windows 10) without having to install some random extension [1] to do so. [1]: https://extensions.gnome.org/extension/1110/hide-clock/ https://extensions.gnome.org/extension/1110/hide-clock/

JimBlackwood 4y ago
What can GNOME do to still chase after power users? I genuinely don’t see what it has to add to powerusers. There’s great window managers and CLI/TUI tools, is there anything GNOME could offer for non-beginners that’s not already done better?
- ndiddy 4y ago
  Unless KDE has significantly changed in the last few months, GNOME is the only DE that supports multiple monitors with different DPIs.

pxmpxm 4y ago

> it has become simple to use for the masses It has? I use gnome bits daily and it's a mess of inconsistent and zero-ux-background-so-i-came-up-with-my-own paradigms. There's no reason why the gterminal, for example, should replace the top most item in the right click menu with hex/oct representation of a number you happen to have selected, or every gnome app keeping affordances in "fun" new places: Compare gedit vs gnome-weather vs gnote vs gcontacts - sometimes there's a hamburger menu, other times there's contextual stuff under an icon, or a button, or a button with a contextual menu. Variety is the spice of life, right? If you're crushing it usability, you certainly can gloat about my way or the highway type of philosophy, but gnome is in no danger of that.

jeroenhd 4y ago
> There's no reason why the gterminal, for example, should replace the top most item in the right click menu with hex/oct representation of a number you happen to have selected I like it. It's useful during programming and it never gets in the way of anything. If you're going minimalist, why even use the right click menu at all? > Compare gedit vs gnome-weather vs gnote vs gcontacts - sometimes there's a hamburger menu, other times there's contextual stuff under an icon, or a button, or a button with a contextual menu. Variety is the spice of life, right? Most options with descriptions are behind the kebab menu on every app, quick controls are icon buttons. It all looks pretty consistent to me. gedit's open/save buttons are a bit weird, I suppose, but if that's all then I don't see the problem, really. You'll find inconsistencies like these on every OS. KDE has its fair share of wonkiness as well if you switch. Even Windows, the most popular operating system in the world, has a range of hamburger menu icons and placements.
tristan957 4y ago
You seem pretty out of date on your opinion. gedit is not in GNOME anymore. GNOME Weather is definitely consistent with the test of the desktop since people did a lot of porting in 42 and 43 to implement designs. GNote is not even a core GNOME application. GNOME Contacts is probably under maintained, but I'm sure if you see design issues, you would bring them up on the issue tracker instead of rambling in a HN comment.

midoridensha 4y ago

"The masses" don't use Linux. They use Windows, Mac, or their phone, or even Chromebooks. The only people using desktop Linux these days are Linux fans, or software developers who need it for work.

taffer 4y ago
Or people who work at government agencies that are forced to use open source software. Or schools or universities or hospitals. Some users have disabilities and accessibility is a requirement.
- midoridensha 4y ago
  I'm not aware of schools, universities, or hospitals using Linux/Gnome. I've heard of it for some US Government systems, where they seem wedded to Red Hat. All the medical computers I've ever seen are running Windows. Maybe RH has a bunch of institutional customers I'm completely unaware of, but as far as I can tell, the Gnome devs seem to be trying to build a GUI aimed at mythological users: non-technical users they somehow think are going to switch to Linux Real Soon Now if only they can entice them with their holy ultra-simplified GUI. The real world doesn't work this way.
  - QUrprUd1nCeicw 4y ago
    That user isn't mythical. I'm a developer and I like GNOME's simplifications. I prefer to spend less time messing about with my window manager and more time actually, you know, developing. If you ask me, the idea that technical people need to spend months hacking around their desktop and fighting with thousands of mutually incompatible config settings just to get it to work is a harmful stereotype perpetuated by the more toxic aspects of the Linux community.
    - traverseda 4y ago
      KDE works fine out of the box and can be customized. It's what I use on my grandparents computer.

Gigachad 4y ago

Gnome complaining seems to be most common from people who spend all day tweaking window border radii and task bar widgets. Some of us have actual work to get done and don't want to play the role of UI designer. I trust that the Gnome people put the work in and get something that's mostly right.

traverseda 4y ago
I use kde with the default theme, but was quite happy with Gnome 2. Honestly most of my complaints aren't about gnome, gnome can do what it wants, they're about gtk apps (like Firefox) that are forced to adopt to terrible gnome conventions just because they use gtk. For example gnomes Terri terrible file picker.