[arch-general] Gnome 3 + KDE 4 are both large disappointments.

[D. Can Celasun]

On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 11:07 PM, Dennis Beekman <
d.c.beekman.devel at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 04/10/2011 03:50 PM, Jelle van der Waa wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 2011-04-10 at 21:50 +0200, Dennis Beekman wrote:
>>
>>> I use linux becuase i think that windows is just to bloated to even be
>>> considered ... but lately Linux has been going in the same direction
>>> when it comes to the desktop enviroments Gnome 3&  KDE 4.
>>>
>>> Gnome 2 was brilliant just a simple easy to use system with load off
>>> good looking features, gnome 3 however is useless in all respects as far
>>> as i can tell from whats in testing.
>>>
>>> 1. You cannot change the panels anymore you stuck with the 2 given by
>>> gnome 3.
>>> 2. Changing themes also is inpossible.. or so it seems.
>>>
>> It's not.
>>
>>> 3. Why do we need a system settings menu with all the options in one
>>> menu ? where are my seperate icons i love so much ? why can we choose
>>> wich icons or options we want ?
>>> 4. What about the people ho don't have or don't wich to use they're
>>> video hardware to run the these stupid graphics ... are we stuck with
>>> "fallback mode" wich is even more stupid and backward ?
>>> 5 Where did all the nice applets go ? and why can i not add them to my
>>> taskbar anymore....
>>> [flaming]
>>> I though KDE 4 was bad  and bloated and that i couldn't get any worse...
>>> it seems i was wrong.
>>> Boy this new Gnome version is even more bloated and buggy then KDE 4
>>> wich is quite the atchievement from the gnome team...
>>>
>>> Now i finnaly understand why the Ubuntu guys decided to use they're
>>> netbook unity system rather then this shit, eventhough unity sucks it
>>> better then Gnome 3 in all respects.
>>>
>>> [/flaming]
>>>
>>> Can we not just keeps using the old version and ignore the new version
>>> of gnome for now until they get they act together ? or hopefully decide
>>> to go back to the old interface and develop that further instead ...
>>>
>>>
>>>  You probably want to read more about GNOME3 and how it breaks with
>> GNOME2. This is not our discussion, but upstreams and we just package
>> vanilla packages. So this 'flame' post is useless.
>>
>>  Well it might be my imagination but it seems Desktop Enviroments on linux
> are more bloated and buggy now then Windows is.
>
> We are being forced to use de's like openbox or xfce wich is the primary
> reason people shy away from unix/linux when changing from Windows to another
> OS.
>

I have to reply to this.

Openbox is not a DE, but for Xfce, I can show you *tons* of screenshots
where you won't be able to say whether it's Xfce or Gnome.

So, go install Xfce 4, rtfm, and configure it to your liking. I'm sure
you'll realize you can make it look *exactly* like Gnome 2.x.


> It just becomes to confusing and complicated from they point of view and
> they choose MAC or another Windows versions instead.
>
> Even i as a seasoned linux user ho switched over from ubuntu to arch a
> while ago it doesn't make any sense to me why they would do this.... i tell
> you the amount of Gnome users in my point is view in going to halve if not
> drop any further then that.
>
> But ofcourse it is Gnome at fault here and not ARCH but still, can we not
> keeps the latest "old" version from before the release in the nomal repo's
> until they update 3.0 a couple of times ?
>