|Line 71:||Line 71:|
The number one reason I switched to Fedora is that
The number one reason I switched to Fedora is that offers Gnome in "extra virgin" flavor. In Gnome 3.6.2 I just need to press 'super' key and I can open any application by typing hints about it or I can switch windows. In Cinnamon switching windows and launching a new application are two different tasks which makes it impossible for me to accept. So while Cinnamon adds features on the top of Gnome 3, it does break down something else. I really liked Gnome's philosopy of removing the unnecessary distinction between a background and an unopen application. This also justifies the lack of minimize button (which is just a command away). Yes, I agree it is difficult to customize Gnome 3 interface and [http://useful-linux-tips.blogspot.com here] is a humble attempt to do so. Rather than stressing on adding customization features to Gnome 3, swithing completely to Cinnamon will be a blunder irrespective of how easy it is to switch.
--[[User:ajayanand|ajayanand]] ([[User talk:ajayanand|talk]])
--[[User:ajayanand|ajayanand]] ([[User talk:ajayanand|talk]])
Revision as of 07:08, 24 February 2013
I disagree, I think the Gnome 3 shell is a fantastic UI. The workflow is fast and quite intuitive as well. Besides, that is what spins are for. If you like cinnamon grab (or make) a cinnamon spin.
Further, I would submit that once you start actually learning and using the keyboard shortcuts in Gnome 3 you will also enjoy it. Just because it is different than what you are used to does not make it evil or bad.
I am not against this at all. I am probably stating the obvious, but Gnome-shell would still need to be just a yum install away and should not become a second-class UI like KDE used to be in Fedora. Personally I quite like Gnome shell, but I know far more people who don't. I also have an issue with its weight, but Cinnamon does not solve that either.
You can add gnome-control-center to this list, since it was forked a few day ago. They also do not actively backport fixes from gnome-shell, since Cinnamon suffer from 819275 ( as polkit break when started from the settings menu in the task bar settings option ) --Misc (talk) 13:21, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Most people I know swiched to fedora BECAUSE it was the only major distribution offering a full gnome 3 as default. Also if no one offer gnome 3 as a default desktop, yes no one is going to get used to it ... and UI is less likely to get improved. I personally like gnome 3 a lot and would swich back to debian if I yhad to change the UI anyways.
Also I belive than the people that flame gnome 3 the most are those doing everything in CLI anyways, windows® user find their way in gnome3 in 5min (not harder than Unity wich is on "the most user-friendly distribution for windows® users" )
Arthur, it's not about finding my way once. I have to use Windows for work and I want to configure Fedora to work in a similar way so I can utilize my motor memory to avoid even thinking about the UI. I could configure GNOME 2 that way, but I cannot do that with GNOME 3. I'm not a CLI-only person, far from it.
I used to be an IceWM user, but I switched to GNOME 2 because I wanted to use applets like NetworkManager. When Fedora switched to GNOME 3, I changed my desktop to LXDE. It's an acceptable solution, but it doesn't get enough love from the Fedora developers. For example, alacarte was totally broken in Fedora 17. That's the only way to edit the LXDE menu. Even though the fix existed, it was never made available to Fedora 17 users.
Fedora 18 has a new problem with keyboard layout switching. I cannot use Alt-Shift, GNOME wants me to use something like Alt-Shift-Space, and even that doesn't work reliably. I had to use some magic command to prevent gconf from messing with my settings. It demonstrates the attitude on GNOME developers. They enabled an incomplete feature that disabled the existing functionality.
I have no strong opinion about Cinnamon, but it would be nice to have a fallback desktop if LXDE stops working for me. And for that fallback to be polished, it would be nice to have it as the default. Not that I would stick with defaults when installing Fedora, it's more about priorities for the Fedora team. --Proski (talk) 22:18, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Chris, not to point out the painfully obvious... but your comment about G3 being just a "yum install" away is already the case for Cinnamon. If that is good enough an answer for G3, it is equally as good an answer for Cinnamon. Since that is already the working solution, there is no need to change.
Arthur, I agree with your points about those who switched to Fedora recently did it to get to G3, this is true of many users. I disagree with the people that complain most are the people that use the CLI most of the time. As a long time Unix/Linux admin I live in the CLI half the time at least. Still, as a command line user I enjoy *NOT* reaching for the mouse all the time. G3 allows me to work very well without using the mouse all the time. My productivity is now nearly as fast in UI as it is in the CLI. I have several colleagues that also use Fedora and they love G3 for the same reasons. If a person that uses the CLI a lot complains about G3 I submit that it is because they have not learned the keyboard shortcuts yet (shame on them). It simply is faster and more fluid than any other UI I have ever used. Yes, cinnamon comes close, I like cinnamon even. It just does not seem to feel as fluid to me as G3 does. --Ddreggors (talk) 05:37, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Let me start out by saying that I haven't used GNOME for years. I personally prefer KDE; and while I think it would be great if KDE were the default desktop - the fact of the matter is it is not. The decision was made years ago for the default to be GNOME and changing it now should only be done for some major reason, such as new licensing terms or lack of support. The fact that some people don't like the look and feel of the current iteration I don't believe is a valid justification.
In any event, if Fedora was to change the default I definitely don't believe it would be appropriate to choose something which has only been out for a few years, and according to Wikipedia even doesn't have "official documentation".
What happens when people decide they don't like the way Cinnamon looks, we change the default again?
You're always going to get some grumbling when things change, that's just human nature. I think it would be more appropriate to work with the GNOME team and voice your concerns. I'm sure there is a method to their madness. If you don't like their direction, as others have pointed out, it is very easy to choose many other desktop environments in Fedora. I've been doing it for years with KDE. --Gbcox (talk) 07:48, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
The feature page states that "There are no new documentation requirements". What about the Fedora User Guide? It has documentation for both of the desktops that are release blocking (Gnome, KDE). I would expect the same for Cinnamon.
On the topic of release-blocking desktops, is it expected that it be expanded to include Cinnamon as an addition to the list or that Cinnamon replace Gnome? Are QE happy to have another release blocking desktop added?
+1 all the way. Leigh Scott does a great job and upstream is healthy.
Why not propose a graphical desktop chooser in the new Anaconda ?
All that's needed is some customizability to Gnome 3
The number one reason I switched to Fedora is that it offers Gnome in "extra virgin" flavor. In Gnome 3.6.2 I just need to press 'super' key and I can open any application by typing hints about it or I can switch windows. In Cinnamon switching windows and launching a new application are two different tasks which makes it impossible for me to accept. So while Cinnamon adds features on the top of Gnome 3, it does break down something else. I really liked Gnome's philosopy of removing the unnecessary distinction between a background and an unopen application. This also justifies the lack of minimize button (which is just a command away). Yes, I agree it is difficult to customize Gnome 3 interface and here is a humble attempt to do so. Rather than stressing on adding customization features to Gnome 3, swithing completely to Cinnamon will be a blunder irrespective of how easy it is to switch. --ajayanand (talk)