Why GNOME Won the Linux Desktop - 6 reasons
Vložit
- čas přidán 19. 06. 2024
- Keep exploring at brilliant.org/InfinitelyGalactic/. Get started for free, and hurry-the first 200 people get 20% off an annual premium subscription.
The GNOME desktop is the default of most of the major Linux desktop distributions in the world. Why is that? Especially when only half of Linux users (when polled) use it? Let's explore.
0:00 Why is GNOME the flagship?
1:27 Funding and Investment
3:15 Sponsor: Brilliant
4:52 Accessibility
6:07 Reactions
7:23 Testing & Research
8:43 Simplicity
10:44 Cycle of Adoption
11:50 Closing thoughts
#gnome #linux #switchtolinux
This video was sponsored by Brilliant.
Links:
Affiliate link to Hostinger hosting: www.hostg.xyz/SH6zz
Donate here...thanks: bit.ly/MOO4KG
Watch on Odysee/LBRY.tv: odysee.com/@infinitelygalactic:b
Sign up to Dropbox: db.tt/Qg1VIS9T
Facebook: / ingalactic
Blog: infinitelygalactic.blogspot.com/
Twitter: #!/ingalactic - Věda a technologie
Keep exploring at brilliant.org/InfinitelyGalactic/. Get started for free, and hurry-the first 200 people get 20% off an annual premium subscription. I really enjoyed making this one - let me know if I should do more of these explainer type videos with a comment/thumbs up. Cheers!
Lack of customization (i.e. much more difficult to break/ mess up) seems to be one of the major reason why most enterprise level distros have chosen it. Imagine you are an IT admin in an organization with 100s of systems running KDE and every user is trying to customize it on their own way (and eventually breaking up one thing or the other) - pretty scary!!! But that is the same reason I love KDE. Although I don't have much against Gnome because you can make it work with a few extensions, but unfortunately they break after every update 😞.
This. More people messing around with settings means more helpdesk tickets. More tickets means more personnel needed. More personnel means bigger costs. It's all about money...
Not to mention that in this use case all the customization is basically bloat. Althogh, lately, I think its unfair to say Gnome can't be customized, it can and its pretty easy, its just not a builtin feature nor is the purpose of the DE at all.
I would say they used to break after each update, seems like from 41 to 43 has been really seemless
The argument on Gnome extensions breaking with updates is kind of the same argument you made about KDE customizations breaking stuff no?
@@voidmind no, because the company can block extensions or even do what's the most common: not upgrade versions for a long time.
I believe that GNOME is the choice for those who want to put some distance between their desktops and Windows like desktops. So if you are searching for something which truly doesn't look like Windows, GNOME comes naturally.
I did not stop using windows to use something that looks like windows..... Sure you can change anything but the desire to do that when you can simply use gnome and be done.
@@feelsbad1193 Exactly what I meant.
@@feelsbad1193 The problem with Windows is not how it looks.
@@folksurvival Did I say it was? Let me answer that, no I did not say that. You also seemed to have missed the entire point of my comment.
@@feelsbad1193 Y9ou said: "I did not stop using windows to use something that looks like windows".
"You also seemed to have missed the entire point of my comment."
Projection.
Workflow/Simplicity/Streamlined you nailed it! I Love a lot about KDE BUT GNOME makes my experience just so much easier. Seems like I can just do everything easier/faster in GNOME.
My experience is the opposite. Gnome was pain. Like how do I minimize or kill the window. And a lot of things you can't do with the mouse and you have to use shortcuts. This is especially annoying when your right hand is on the mouse and the left hand is 'bussy'
@@hamobu I can see that. It comes down to each person and how they think/work I guess. However, (i run Fedora) and I don't even have to touch the keyboard to leave a program or active window and go to another desktop or window or start another program. Just press one of my mouse right side buttons and BAM back to desktop can click to go anywhere. Works so nice so easy -- for me.
@@Mastarfiin @@hamobu @@Mastarfiin I have to give you all credit for sharing your experiences. It definitely seems that GNOME isn't for everybody (including me), but I have no ill will towards the users (the developers, even some like Miguel de Icaza, who started GNOME but later left and started mainly using macOS and even went to Microsoft, and Lennart Poettering needs a reality check for making systemd a *requirement* for modern versions of GNOME, are a different story, however).
@@hamobu Ok Coomer.
How is it easier when it's missing the most basic of features? It's terrible!
Who said it won? Ahh, The desktop Wars, only eclipsed by the vitriol between emacs and vi users. Those where dark days.
Years ago, QT was owned by Trolltek and this created serious concerns for business users when looking at deploying KDE. Nokia buying it and the fork sorted a lot of that out, but it gave GTK the lead it needed.
Yes, the pro market is Gnome. But OpenSuSE is KDE, as is Manjaro, Kubuntu took 2 min to launch (still have an early mail order disk), and KDE landed on the Steam deck...that is going to alter the landscape.
I think default experience is also key. It takes just a couple of minutes to get gnome set up to my workflow (dash to panel). For KDE, it generally takes closer to half an hour with all the settings upon settings that can be tweaked.
GNOME originally won for one reason only - it was the first desktop to be fully free software. The first two "free" desktop environments - KDE and Xfce - used proprietary toolkits (Qt and XForms, respectively). GNOME usurped the GIMP Toolkit, which was free software to begin with. Funding, UX research, and accessibility came later with the involvement of companies like Eazel - ex-Apple engineers who created Nautilus, Sun Microsystems who contributed a lot of UX research and accessibility development, and of course Red Hat who funded and supported the project very early on. A set of high quality, easy to use applications with a consistent user interface was the result of all this work, and why GNOME 2 especially was such a success.
Then emmanuele bassi, bastien nocera, and german poo camano, decided to bastardize it. Took a little over 4 years just to fix their performance issues, doesn't help gnome tweaks, forces dog paw touchpad right clicks, and hypocritically has an app "overview" yet doesn't support tabs.
@@eisas1306 Emanuelle Bassi is the definition of a prick.
I have used Gnome and KDE on a variety of Linux distros including Ubuntu, Manjaro, Endeavour OS, Fedora / Nobara, Mint and Redhat, and always end up gravitating back towards Gnome, because it better suits my workflow. Gnome Vs KDE is a very personal choice because they are both good desktops. I like how the KDE desktop offers great levels of customization, plus some excellent apps such as Kate, but this customisation flexibility has also been a great source of frustration to me, when I have inadvertently turned something on, that I don't like, and it has taking me ages to work out how to revert it. Gnome extensions and tweaks don't always offer the same level of customisation granularity you get with KDE, but they are simple to enable, configure (when config options are offered), disable, and remove, and sometimes you need to enable the right mix of extension and tweak the theme and icons to get the desktop that's just right for you. Gnome also offers a great lock keys state indicator that simply works, whereas the KDE equivalent was more problematic to get working and the interface was not so polished. And course, if you are feeling reckless, Gnome has the dconf editor!
Gnome 3 has had to come a long way to not look butt ugly. I like the innovation of it, but hate all of the visual padding and the bloat when compared to competing DE's. I like what Cinnamon has done with it, and KDE is still my choice so far. For me, It has just recently (Gnome 40) changed into something compelling. Keep in mind, it is still way better than the Mac OS or Windows experience.
Adwaita looked so ugly and outdated, libadwaita solved this for me and I think it looks beautifull
macOS is the best experience talking about a desktop interface (imo of course), but Gnome untill 3.38 is very good, it's fast and beautiful, I think they ruined the app drawer on 40+
@@unknown_codec_404 I have to say Gnome 43 has taken the cake when it comes to laptop UI. It works better than MacOS, makes way more sense.
@@sharkuel nah mac’s panel integration with applets and the way they can integrate so well is astonishing. Gnome though really good doesn’t play in the same field
@@pineppolis anything good about macOS is ruined by the terrible window management (unless they have finally fixed this of course in which case let me know lol)
Gnome is great! I would have preffered it! Yet I am currently a KDE user because (a) no stuttering on KDE animations like we have with Gnome (tripple buffering is yet to be desired in Gnome) and (b) KDE window browser (dolphin) is much better than Nautilus
KDE has the better apps. Kate, ktorrent, konsole, dolphin are all great tools. I feel locked and unproductive when using gnome.
Nautilus is a glorified file viewer at this point
7. Gnome is relatively lightweight. Not because it is super optimized, but because it's being developed with intensive approach in mind. Therefore, any cheap laptop handles it easily nowadays, it's sort of Volkswagen of the Linux world. Many KDE users think that lightweight means less RAM after cold boot, and never show all indicators in real tasks. Because in real tasks not only RAM sucks, but also CPU and I/O (which is not suprising if a program handles million parameters to provide a complex behavior)
It was lightweight back in the KDE 3 & GNOME 2 days, but now with KDE Plasma 5, KDE Plasma is lighter and GNOME 3 and on got so bloated (and dependent on systemd).
Sure, I am aware that GNOME 3 and on is not for me. But GNOME 3 and later definitely isn't lightweight. XFCE & LXQt are lightweight. Heck, even KDE Plasma 5 has gotten better in that regard.
@@cameronbosch1213 I said 'relatively' - to real competitors, that is, not the projects that introduced MP3 thumbnails in 2022. At the moment we have two competitors and Gnome is the lightest and most reliable one
I recall benchmarks that I can't find now, but KDE was close to XFCE while gnome was much more memory demanding.
@@hamobu Yep. That's why I'd only recommend GNOME if you're willing to accept it's higher memory usage (4 GB of RAM would be the minimum for GNOME 3 & later imo). Though I have no problems foe people who use it, it's not for me.
Yeah sorry to burst the bubble but KDE is massively lighter on the CPU these days on par with XFCE which is renowned for being lightweight. Gnome is much heavier on the CPU.
Great work as always!! Love watching your videos and appreciate your work.
I am not sure it 'won'. Vanilla gnome is not for me - it feels like it is built for a touch screen mobile experience and not necessarily for keyboard-centric usage that some people, myself included, prefer. I will always be a KDE person but recently I moved to popOS and I have to say, System76's fork of gnome - and the new rust based cosmic DE that they are testing - will become standard. It is as close to perfect a middle ground for someone like me who likes tiling and keyboard centricity when I am interacting with the OS, but without the insane levels of complexity that KDE opens up because of endless configurability.
Yep Winning is subjective, amongst linux users ? not by a long shot. did they attract new users based on their merits Not by a long long shot.
Gnome (vanilla) is actually very keyboard centric if you get used to it.
@@jabba969 very true, that's the big surprise about it, alas the lack of functionnalities and therefore too much reliance on extension is the Achilles heel so to speak.
Try Budgie.
A desktop environment where the expected workflow is to alt-tab like crazy doesn't sound touch screen friendly.
Gnome has always been the best UI but had terrible performance. Now they fixed the GPU acceleration on the OS animations so it's perfect especially with the gnome 40 changes to the super key menu. The gnome 42 screenshot tool and the gtk 4.0 update.
Valve are now paying some developers to enhance KDE. You could say KDE now has some steam behind it :)
I think they ride a very fine line between innovating and learning from proprietary desktops.
I mean c'mon, the new quick toggle feature is ripped straight from Windows and MacOS. But that's great! If you steal, steal from the best!
BUT they also make wild choices like turning a desktop into an actual empty desk, with drawers that you pull your work from. It's a great experience!
If they put in Extension Manager and Gradience by default it would be the perfect desktop. It's basically a blank slate.
Also the icons are massive on dock and drawer. It’s hideous.
I'm definitely on team Gnome. BUT I find it amazing how popular Gnome is despite it's devs making some very counter-intuitive design choices such as the decision to try remove 3rd party app-indicators from the system tray. This is a UI element that is fundamental to almost any OS going back at least to early Windows days. Even today Ubuntu has to ship the "app-indicator extension" to put this back. The same is true of maximize/minimize buttons.
But they are brilliant in having consistency for UI design throughout the apps and OS. You encounter the same things everywhere, and so you become familiar with it.
When 3rd party devs also utilize this design, the user already has a decent understanding of using their app.
It just makes sense.
The removal of the tray icons wasn't a design decision but it was done because there's no standard and all technologies that exist don't work well under Wayland and/or in Flatpak so they decided to remove the code that displays them until there's a standard that works well with new technologies. At the moment there are people working on a new freedesktop standard which GNOME also wants to support.
I agree with the app indicator thing, I'm using it myself since there's no useful way to know if I have Slack notifications at first glance. But this can bloat your shell kind of easily, moreover with all the apps using indicators when they don't need to (looking at you Zoom). On the other hand, I LOVE not having such useless things as a minimize and maximize buttons, I don't know how people fought that decision so fiercely. It was a bold decision that nobody in the market was willing to do, but GNOME did and it was perfect. I think GNOME is one of the most innovative desktops out there, I think they even pioneered using the header bar for UI elements (another excellent decision), even before Apple.
@@odarkos The option to have the indicators is fine. You should always be able to enable/disable them.
Gnome's philosophy is that there's no need for 3rd party apps to be there, and that's simply not true.
As for Min/Max buttons, you may not use them, but users who aren't keyboard-centric are going to hate it.
Hello,
I have a weird problem with my gnome desktop.
when I try to open a folder on the desktop instead it's Atom that opens.
Please advise me or guide me to solve this problem.
"I use Linux, but I'm not a developer so I'm fixing that"
That's literally one of the biggest problem with Linux desktop. The expectation that the user is a developer
Something interesting I noted was that Linux hardware vendors seems to be avoiding Gnome lately, and I'm not sure why.
The Deck is one, and a decisive factor cited was that the devs just liked KDE but I'm sure there are other reasons. Kubuntu Focus was always going to be KDE-based but I have no idea why they don't just be Ubuntu Focus. Tuxedo outright makes their own distro and they chose KDE for some reason. I don't know what's even going on in Linux Phone scene anymore but last I recall KDE was ahead in adoption but it might have changed since I've heard good things about Phosh. And even outside of KDE you have System76 who would rather make their own DE with Rust and HDR over staying with Gnome or using KDE.
My speculation is that Gnome is good for distro where a good polished DE with the latest technology and they don't need to worry or think about is better for them, but for hardware vendor who needs to stand out and wants control for what they present to their customers, as well as being familiar to most users who must have used Windows at some point. I think KDE has gotten good at being a white label solution for those who want control and predictability in development, but if building a DE isn't as complicated as it is then they might have all just follow System76.
Gnome is probably just really convenient for devs, so that's why devs and distro that doesn't have to worry about "normies" would just pick Gnome and be done with it because you they can get used to and appreciate Gnome for its tech and vision, and they could focus on something else.
It is true that GNOME is the #1 DE chosen by many distros but when you go to Sourceforge and get the download history of some well known distros like Gecko Linux, Arco Linux, Manjaro (distributions that offer more than 3 differents DE including GNOME and KDE Plasma) always KDE Plasma is been downladed more than GNOME (in 2 of the 3 distros mentioned is been downloaded more than twice). Going further, I haven't found a distro which offers both DE's where GNOME outrun KDE Plasma.
This is a somewhat skewed way of looking at the statistics. Most people that want to run gnome will probably just choose one of the main distros. One of the reason some people choose more ‘obscure’ distros is because they don’t want to run gnome.
I also think KDE users are more likely to be tinkerers that enjoy the more obscure distros, whereas I think gnome users are more likely people that do not want to tinker as much and just stick with the main distros.
@@jabba969 It's true that this is a somewhat skewed way of looking at the statistics. However, so is looking at the default desktop of major distributions. Just because they picked it doesn't mean users have picked it. It's really difficult to look at this without a built in bias to what statistics you decide to look at.
It’s arguable. Gnome desktop looks like it’s designed for tablets rather than laptops. KDE plasma is more functional and convenient in use.
I agree, every time I try it, I go back to KDE. Gnome is more suited for tablet use, like Windows 8 maybe.
It's optimized for almost any formfactor. Making apps and ux modern and minimal isn't called a tablet friendly ux. I do like both tho.
I disagree. Gnome gives me the best Desktop experience ever. A tiling WM comes close, but not KDE. (though I can understand that someone likes it, but Gnome is first and foremost Desktop with mobile an afterthought).
But KDE is too windows like. Gnome is closer to osx and works better for my workflow
KDE is definitely more functional. It is like something developed by Fred Sanford. Cobbled together and feature bloated..
I use Pop OS--but when you think about, KDE or MATE are really the only desktops you need, because they can be customize to look and flow exactly like anything else.
Lots of DEs can do this, not just those two.
@@wilddemur9796 I agree. XFCE is also good in that regard.
KDE is flexible, but this isn't exactly true. I switched back to GNOME because KDE's overview has a noticeable delay that GNOME does not.
@@zacharyhinkle6849 Have you tried MATE?
@@fubaralakbar6800 yes, but probably not since 2014 or so. Does MATE even have that functionality without installing something like xfdashboard?
Another reason why Gnome may be more popular is that it's much easier to maintain. Gnome has one major update once every 6 months. Meanwhile, KDE has Plasma updates every 4 months, KDE has Gear updates every 4 months (but not at the same time as KDE Plasma updates), and KDE has Frameworks updates every month. This leaves distro a decision whether to keep itself up to date (which means handling a lot of updates) or sticking to the same Plasma, Gear, and Frameworks versions until the next big distro release. KDE also just has a lot more components that need to be updated too.
Good point mate thx.
I like gnome cause it's simple, whenever I use somthing like KDE, I get overwhelmed with options. Once you get used to Gnome workflow, you learn to appreciate it, I julst love how it works.
I like simplicity and don't like GNOME. I find Plasma a lot simpler to use, with much saner defaults.
@@CyborgZeta I also very much prefer using Android over a desktop OS, if the applications I use could run on Android I would very much ditch my laptop for a good Android tablet. Maybe that's why I love Gnome so much, it resembles the UI language of a mobile GUI. Never used it on a tablet, but I bet Gnome feels really good on a touchscreen.
@@CyborgZeta yes...pretty simple with zillions of checkboxes..XD
Gnome 42 with few extensions, wow. 😎
I've used all the major desktop environments and at this stage, GNOME is the only one I'm interested in using (with a few extensions added). I personally appreciate SOME customisation options but desktops that advertise themselves as "completely configurable in every way" just leave users confused half the time. GNOME is fantastic for my workflow and I won't be changing from it anytime soon!
kinda same for me but i'm looking at cosmic de with interest and will give it a shot when it's somewhat ready
And since Linux=Choice I like a DE that offers lots of options. That's becoming less common these days. Back in the day I used KDE 3.x which as I think Lunduke once said "KDE has options on its options." Too true. And some people hate that but my frustration with GNOME is if there's something I dislike about the defaults maybe I can change it and maybe I can't. I find GNOME unusable without extensions for example.
@@lunsj then those extensions seem to break time to time. KDE or any other UI makes things better. They have improved in last years, but still not my cup of tea.
Gnome is good for what it’s trying to accomplish. Just not for me personally.
Well, there are the obvious reasons, like the fact that it was the first fully open-source desktop, and the fact that Red Hat was pushing it so hard. Other reasons are simply related to the GTK toolkit itself. A lot of GNU developers preferred GTK being based on C rather than Qt being based on C++. It's also worth noting that GNOME 2/GTK 2 was actually really good and wasn't nearly as ugly, touchscreen-focused, and lacking customization options as modern GNOME, so those who might have otherwise opposed GNOME becoming such a dominant force had no reason to push against it at that time. It also really doesn't help that projects like MATE and Cinnamon are basically unofficial GNOME ESRs that keep the more traditional look alive for as long as possible, and give those unhappy with upstream GNOME a temporary reprieve before they are forced to embrace whatever GNOME did that they hated anyway, simply because the maintainers of MATE and Cinnamon don't have the chops to maintain a project like GTK on their own, and will thus be forced to follow in GNOME's direction sooner or later no matter how bad it looks. In fact, if you want a preview of future versions of MATE, you might as well just look at GNOME Classic today. I think by far, one of the biggest problems today with trying to use anything other than GNOME, though, is that most major web browsers use GTK, and your cursor will be forced to look like Adwaita if you use anything else, which means you're stuck either installing GNOME so you can tweak the look, being stuck with Adwaita, or trying to configure the appearance of GTK stuff without a control panel. The thing you'll find quickly on Linux is that whether you like GTK/GNOME or not, most of the apps you'll need/want are using GTK and look terrible on desktops that aren't either GNOME itself, forks of it, or at least GTK-based and thus dependent on it.
I would say this is something that could be added is GNOME is straightforward. While the amount of options and settings KDE Plasma offers is something some Linux users value, others could definitely want an OS's settings simplified to not confuse users. An example is if you're on a laptop and want to change power settings, KDE Plasma has 3 sections in these settings for if the laptop is plugged in, on battery power, and when it gets to a critical point. While GNOME does have separate settings for a laptop being critically low and otherwise, the settings aren't as in depth. Again, Plasma users may not prefer this, but I think businesses preferred this approach overall as to not overwhelm the users of the desktop environment.
I think it is quite simple really. GNOME is very specifically built for the corporate user in the workplace, while KDE covers the needs of personal users at home. Try using (vanilla) GNOME to regularly copy your holiday pics from a usb stick to a NAS device and sort them into different folders in the process.. and you'll quickly get mad about the fact that nautilus doesn't even have a split window functionality. Try installing a simple "home use" app, such as radiotray on GNOME, so that you can listen to some music while sorting your foto collection.... won't work before you've installed an appindicator extension. Yes, you can tweak GNOME to work for personal usage, but its a hassle because extensions often break and become unusable after updates. I use KDE on my personal devices, because it just works and GNOME doesn't. But for IT admins GNOME's shortcomings are features. They not only don't care about the personal user's needs, they actually want to discourage you from using your corporate laptop in this way.
And that - in a nutshell - is why GNOME is the default desktop on many distros. It is also why hardware vendors seem to have a preference for KDE. If those hardware vendors ever manage to create mainstream appeal for the Linux desktop (not going to happen, I know) then GNOME would also be forced to cater to the needs of the public and not just developers / professional users.
1. KDE has a notable amount of funding too! I mean, one of their affiliated apps, Krita, is rapidly gaining in popularity on Windows & Android (unfortunately, due to iOS/iPadOS App Store restrictions on FOSS apps, it would be a miracle for it to appear there; I'm not holding my breath). The only thing I don't like is that only Arch-based distros seem to be running KDE Plasma as intended / vanilla and no snaps (KDE Neon has snaps and a rather old Ubuntu base, while Kubuntu & Ubuntu Studio are the opposite and still have Snaps, and Fedora has bloat and issues galore).
2. On accessibility, I'll give you that one for now, though it can and will get better for KDE as more and more users use Plasma (and the Steam Deck, which uses Plasma for the desktop mode).
3. While this may have been an issue with Qt in the past, I don't see that becoming an issue anymore.
4. See 1, but also this section makes you seem like a biased GNOME fanboy, and I don't like biased fanboys of anything.
5. Simplicity is a good factor. For users who have only used smartphones or macOS, I think GNOME 40 (and later) will be a good fit for them. However, if you are coming from Windows as a primary OS, then prepare to start complaining and relearning almost EVERYTHING unless you use GNOME Extensions or install a different DE, which many newer Linux users might not know how to do or that it's even possible. So they'll get a bad first impression of Linux and likely go back to Windows and not want to try again for a while, if ever. This happened to me; I used Ubuntu from 10.04 to 11.04, and liked it, even Unity wasn't a problem for me because I had some experience with macOS (but I didn't like it and still don't like it). When I came back in 2019 to Ubuntu, it was one of the most frustrating experiences I had ever used, and it took 6 months to find Kubuntu, which while better, wasn't perfect. Recently, I settled on Arch-based distros (specifically EndeavourOS) because they get the best of KDE Plasma, newest applications and kernels, and is actually smoother than Kubuntu, Ubuntu Studio, KDE Neon, or Fedora. And no Snaps, which I despise with a passion.
6. Cycle of adoption wouldn't be a problem if distros didn't force GNOME in users faces by default, even during GNOME 2, because when GNOME 3 dropped, it caused a HUGE uproar in the community, and some distros either went with a different forked DE (Ubuntu with Unity, Linux Mint with Cinnamon) or even went to a different DE (like Debian, which was forced to use XFCE for a while due to how bloated GNOME was, as GNOME 3 it wouldn't fit on the install CD).
In my experience, one of the factors of why Linux hasn't been successful for desktop OS is GNOME and the GNOME Project. I mean, forcing GNOME users to have to use systemd (which some people may not like, though I personally don't care either way), extensions or dnconf for changing simple things like adding the minimize and maximize buttons or change other simple things, and for some top people in the project to have this stuck-up attitude towards the community doesn't make Linux look good. We need more people like EndeavourOS's community and less people like these elitists if we want Linux to grow.
Gnome 4x series offers imo the best desktop experience yet of any DE or OS. The workflow paradigm is perfect and the design & UX are aesthetically pleasing without getting in the way of functionality. I just hope they figure out a way to standardize extensions so they don't all break with each release.
Ubuntu Gnome is the best version of Gnome, I like to use the customized version but I don't like vanilla Gnome, why no app dock? Why no desktop icons?
Not having dekstop icons is a good thing. Forces you not to make a mess of your system
@@FakeMichau Sounds like a excuse to not have desktop icons
@@FakeMichau It is not a good thing to be forced.
Having a choice is good.
My system, my choice, no desktop icons, no (vanilla)gnome...
...for me.
It is for me to decide if i put stuff on my desk(top).
Where do you put your keyboard and mouse? Probably on your desk(top). I do.
Where do children at school put their pencil and papersheet? On the desk(top).
Just put stuff you want to keep somewhere and delete stuff you don't need.
Can this be done with other directories/folders? Yes.
Should i be forced to do so? No.
Why do i use the word "other"? Because the desktop is a directory/folder as well, a working directory.
Thats my take on it :)
The thing about Gnome for me is that it’s just works. Also it’s a lot about your personal philosophy on using your PC - you have to agree with “Gnome way” of computing, you can customize but nothing you can do would change Gnome fundamentally, if it does, you might aswell use XFCE or KDE.
The underlying file tools (k3b, ksysguard, etc.) are more consistent across KDE distros, Gnome is too busy reinventing the wheel all the time. I mean, Linux as a whole is kind of guilty of that, but Gnome in particular fetishizes reinvention, even of things that are perfectly fine as-is.
I think some clarity should be offered. Gnome started out as a reaction to the fact that Qt was once proprietary, decades ago. That is no longer the case, and hasn't for a very long time.
I'd hardly call Gnome's "research" real UI research, when even they admit it was not a broad sampling. "Many of the research exercises were small and limited." [1]
Gnome was largely subsidized by corporations who used it as their desktop of choice. Back in 2010, 70 percent of the code commits for GNOME come from paid participants. [2]. That corporate support is why I believe that companies that sponsored Linux distributions defaulted to Gnome. When you add to that a community that has an active disdain for C++ over C; I believe it has far less to do with the quality of Gnome.
Miguel de Icaza helped founded Gnome then later abandoned the project, having considered concept of a "Linux Desktop" a failure. Some of his criticism regarding it is, to my mind at least, perfectly valid reasoning.[3]
The Gimp project created GTK originally. Gimp taken 10 years to port to GTK3, and it is still not released. If GTK/Gnome is the flagship desktop, I'd have to ask why that situation exists. I suspect it has to do with GTK 3 having had an unstable API/ABI for a long time, due to the developers at the Gnome Project. That kind of instability has a long lasting reputation in many circles.
I suspect that Plasma was chosen for the Steam Deck because it can be separated from KDE. It's stable, tested, and already adapted to mobile platforms. Much of Gnome is far too integrated.
1. blogs.gnome.org/shell-dev/2021/02/15/shell-ux-changes-the-research/
2. www.redhat.com/en/blog/gnome-study-shows-red-hat-desktop-development-lead
3. tirania.org/blog/archive/2012/Aug-29.html
Fedora gnome is the most beginner friendly linux distros of all time and most stable for a casual windows user and I'm loving it (Simplicity &Stability )👍🏼
Never got totally why it got so big. You make some points, but on my head I see this way:
-Regular baffling decisions, like when with version 30 they hid the power off button and didn't document that you needed to press "alt" while clicking to access it. And some Devs will be rude and refuse to change those for months.
-Lack of customisation. You got all the extensions, but the framework changes so often that if you find what you need, probably it will stop working soon.
-If you develop those extensions, it must be hell to keep it updated too because of the random changes.
-Core elements tied to SystemD. Not wanting to start flaming, but there are Distros which doesn't use it and even other OS like BSD. By creeping SystemD in something that doesn't need it, you are making life for users and devs of other OS a constant headache, till eventually it will become unusable.
Gnome can work without systemd well
@@alexisfinaris2051 I know, but it needs some patchy workaraounds and not all functionality is there. And not only Gnome, KDE which is what I use atm can't manage the firewall from the control center, pe. My fear is that it'll reach a point where it just won't work at all.
I've had used Xfce for years. It was the best (up to version 4.14)! Ease of use - check; accessibility - check; configurability - check, themeability - check, lightweightness - check. Then they started to change it. Right now I cant configure it the way I used to.. so I looked elsewhere. Since I developed my own GTK theme I had to search for GTK DE. Also, I have new PC so I can give my DE more resources. The best alternative for me were Cinnamon and Gnome. .... I do not agree with you about accessibility features in gnome. I.e. changing font size in settings (tweaks) does nothing to gnome-shell font size. It remains small. On the other hand, increasing scaling factor makes other UI elements (i.e. panel) to large. (xfce is much better in that regard). Oh yeah! you need separate Tweaks application to do any of previously mentioned tweaks. Main settings app - accessibility options - offer just "large text" without fine tuning ("large text" may be to large for some or to small for others). So... with accessibility being not polished and lack of customization (I don't know anyone that uses vanilla Gnome with no extensions... and extensions are known to break) ... I'm not sure Gnome deserves all praise it gets. Don't get me wrong; I AM currently using Gnome (old versiono from debian stable :P .. but mentioned problems are still present in Gnome 43.1) and there are features I really like! But, it's still not polished. Not the way xfce 1.14 used to be. Uf, this post is being to long & nobody cares 🤣
I care, and I don't like the idea of installing Tweaks for some basic settings in other DEs,
Gnome is simple as a UI, but also I feel it's making my laptop fan working much more...
And about Tweaks, Gnome Software and more ...
It was a pain to disable gnome software tho
Yes, gnome cycles are a pain, breaks so much stuff and are too fast. I feel locked and unproductive using gnome. Now i'm using OpenSuse KDE.
I disliked Gnome and hated Wayland but coming back to it now as I use Debian for the first time I'm impressed. The workflow of Waylands multitouch on a Gnome laptop is so, so good. I also was under the assumption that Gnome could not be themed as well as KDE and boy was I wrong. It's a little more involved to heavily theme gnome but I discovered this Flatpak program called gradience that allows you to match the boring grey adwaita theme with your freshly downloaded nord or sweet whatever. I'm kicking myself for sacking Gnome off all this time when it's one of the best possible DE's to use on a laptop. Yeah you have to make the odd ~./theme or ~./icon folder so it's not like KDE's 1 hit wonder but it's worth it.
maybe a good time to review ROSA 2022..!!!.. 10yr anniversary for you - maybe?.. I started using it and.. I like it.. alot.. !!
I can't fault your logic... still can't stand Gnome though. In a work environment, though, you'd just learn to adjust. Where Gnome is simple, Plasma can be quite complex... it'd be interesting to see how it would work out as a full time work environment. I'm with you on Unity. It was going out as I started Linux... but I'm pretty impressed and will try it for a month as a DD shortly.
The only problem with Gnome is that it uses GTK, which is miles behind KDE's Qt. For example GTK to this day still doesn't support multiple variable display resolutions. I'm not sure if they even have proper fractional scaling, and a bunch of basic features you would expect a window manager to have. It's to the point that people blame X11 for GTK's shortcomings
I thought Wayland supports this in Gnome.
What are your hopes for the new Cosmic desktop environment?
Internationalization and accessibility are really big points!
Literally billions of people need to write using a non-Latin writing system (think: Chinese, Japanese, Arabic, all Indian languages...), and therefore need some special input method. All distros that ship with GNOME (i.e. Fedora, Ubuntu, etc.) make it very easy to add the required input method.
With other Desktop Environments (KDE, xfce, etc.), this is really an afterthought, and hard to configure. Those DEs tend to focus mainly on eye-candy and "the ability to configure everything" rather than the ability for non-English-speaking people to write in their native language...
xfce does not focus mainly on eye candy...
@@folksurvival Toaster Linux gang
For me, it is something else you are talking about, because the most eye-candy and counter-usable is gnome. By the way, adding another input method isn't causing problems in any of big distros, regardless of DE.
I've been a Linux enthusiast for a long time and keep exploring different distros on my old beat up laptop. However, for general use I still feel it is not useful enough as Windows/Apple. Way too many distros/DE, package managers and lack of productivity suites like Office, Photo/Video editors etc.
i love gnome, kde would break on me with even basic changes. even when i customised gnome more than my kde desktop (with extensions etc) it was more stable than kde. (i last used kde 5.25).
ive been on a pretty simple sway config for a while and cant see myself going back to a de
still prefer GNOME over other DE, just I was used to it when I used Debian 11 (GNOME 3.38) for the first time.
those were entirely my opinions.
I'd say gtk won the widget battle, and cinnamon won the desktop war. Heck, if Mint dropped Ubuntu and went direct to Debian ( and LMDE the default ), they would win the distro war as well. Especially if they went to a curated testing branch.
Liked and sub'd due to subject and accent. Oi oi oi. Also ... I remember KDE ruling the roost but having boring icons and layout while Gnome (pronounced like garden gnome ... NOT G Nome) had really cool window dressing and lovely icons. Am I not pretty enough (said the Gnome)?
I was previously a devoted Plasma user and thought GNOME looked ugly and clunky. After a few too many frustrations with Plasma (bugs and a bad Wayland experience) I but the bullet and gave GNOME a try - it's so much more polished. The conclusion I came to was also that funding must play a role, KDE doesn't really have a "flagship" donor like GNOME has Red Hat.
Interesting to note - while GNOME seems to be the default in the enterprise world, Linux hardware vendors (Tuxedo, Slimbook and now Valve) seem to prefer Plasma.
Good thing xfce & lxqt still exist! :)
I pass on Gnome because it has too many dependencies & I cannot customize it the way that I like. If I cannot place icons on my desktop OR my panel whenever I feel like it, then forget it.
What about tiling in Gnome? Or not shaking windows after resize them, or how about customization.... Gnome is good if you use gnome for browsing or games, but if you working on gnome, that so annoying......
I love gnome very much. Also xfce and i3wm.
I’ve always loved KDE and find the extensions system of gnome odd and clunky
Excellent video!!!! 😃
I have tried Gnome more than a few times and I still prefer other desktop environments. Extensions don't seem stable enough when updating and at least if memory serves I always had to install Gnome Tweak which should be part of the operating system.
I always prefer xfce, is that weird?
Totally agreed with you.
Well, gnome only fulfills simplicity for a very specific workflow. For other worklows, vanilla gnome is complicated and combersome.
Just like every other operating system on the planet. You won't expect to use virtual desktops frequently on Windows, nor would you expect to tile on macOS. In macOS, it's a similar case because macOS also requires something to be installed for itself too. Try to learn it's work flow or you can switch. Though considering how popular Fedora is, I would consider a lot of people just ended up learning the work flow anyway.
@@white-bunny What has virtual desktops to do with a work flow?
Also "you" cannot "adapt" to a work flow, cause obviously a workflow is defined by the work you do. So obviously the DE has to be able to adapt to a variety of workflows the work of the users have to do. And that is why I am fine with macOS or Gnome on specific PCs/installs, depending on what I use them for and whether that fits the according workflow.
I guess i would debate the original premise here. I know Distro Watch has its flaws in terms of usage, but if the numbers there are even remotely and indicator of usage, then it is debatable that Gnome is even the most used. Per them the top 3 sites have been MX, Endeavour, Mint and Manjaro, neither MX or Mint use gnome and Endeavour and Manjaro, gnome is just one of the potential choices. Ubuntu's version is highly customized, Linux Lite is 9th and they dont use gnome, Garuda offers it but again highly customized among many options, OpenSuse it is one of many options, Zorin offers gnome and Xfce, and and KDE offers their own desktop, and Elementary has their own and Antix doesn't offer it That's the top 15 distros per distrowatch making up about half of all Linux desktop users likely and 6 of them dont even have gnome as an option, several has gnome as 1 of many options, and a couple others offer highly customized versions of it, ie not vanilla gnome out of the box.
Not passing judgement on the quality of the desktop, (i dont personally use it as it doesn't fit my workflow), but the original premise that gnome has won the desktop i think is debatable. If you keep going down the list PCLinux does not use gnome, EasyOS doesnt, Sparky doesnt. Yes many distro's offer it or is their primary DE, but if i had to guess, it is well under 50% of the Linux Desktop users have vanilla Gnome as their DE.
Good point.
Entrerprises are not interested in tinkering around, they want something that works. The paradigm of the one way of doing things and the stability of the gnome desktop are the reasons IMHO.
KDE is somewhat a mess and each time I tried it, I had some crashes…
Don’t get me wrong, I still love KDE, but in professional environment gnome is ahead.
Vanilla gnome is still ass, everyone just installs dash-to-panel and a couple dozen other extensions because that's still easier than changing the DE altogether.
I found it often the least frustrating to work with. I don't mind KDE either but I think for me as a Windows User I found Gnome overall smoother and less frustrating.
I don't think you can "win" the Linux Desktop. I think it's more an _Infinite Game_ like Simon Sinek describes it: Sometimes you are ahead, sometimes you are behind. but the 'game' is only lost if you stop developing your product.
But at the end of the day we all know that Linux on Desktops is only for the Pros and their fetish who do everything in the terminal and that nobody really cares about who the Kind of the Linux DE market is. So even if you could "win" the Linux Desktop, it would be an insignificant victory nobody will care about.
That's a ridiculous stereotype. I only use terminal as a last resort, or when there are literally no gui-based tools to do what needs doing, owing to potential complexities...like ripping audio from a video clip using ffmpeg
I love gnome, but it looks over blown on my 1366x768 monitor :(
Right...and VHS was actually better than Beta to.
KDE never really recovered from the demise of Nokia. Nokia gambled big on Qt the underlining technology that under pin KDE.
Nokia owned Qt and pured lots of resources to its development, Nokia saw its future in Qt and by extention employed lots of developers to improve Qt and many of those developers were from the KDE community and or the devepment of Qt trickled down to KDE.
When Nokia stumbled and was bought by MS. Many developers paid to work on Qt left and today other than a couple of companies KDE is essentially a voluntary project and many part of KDE today are not being actively maintained.
Gnome like you noted grew massively many thanks to Redhat and Canonical. Redhat should get the biggest credit though. Majority of development of Gnome is done by Redhat paid developers. The result is in the difference in polish
GNOME _(and other group collaborative open source software projects)_ are things I would make (and have made) donations to, but I also deliberately donate to individual guys who make similar systems because I like the fact that, even though they seem nothng but nice, if they ever wanted to, they could potentially become stubborn and impose their will upon other people by keeping a project afloat with the same name-making significance and yet they get all the glory which to some might seme unfair. Examples include (Patrick Volkerding) Slackware, (Victor) UltimateBootCD, (Matthew Dillon) DragonflyBSD and (Eric Turgeon) GhostBSD. Those guys are the "lone wolf". OpenBSD is a bit of a grey area floating between the two because it has OpenSSH and a bunch of large organisations and companies use that, so that one is sort of inbetween lone-wolf and collaborative entity, but I'd say he's mostly in the lone-wolf part of his ven diagram. There are some guys who make open source accelerators for the Commodore Amiga and old Atari computers _(converting them into surprisingly modern machines, and yes you can even run BSD on some of them)_ and a subset of those blokes have a sort of attitudenal swagger.
An example "swagger" move was when Patrick Volkerding deliberately kept on using an older linux kernel _(perhaps for dependency tree or stability reasons or perhaps instead whatever other reason he wanted)_ in a Slackware release. It had a sort of "veto-ish" vibe to it. These guys (mentioned above) are like Prince Regents of software, acting like bottlenecks with the ability to cut off flotsam and jetsam as sunk costs to specialise or generalise as they see fit. People can eventually become dependent upon them, and dependence has the potential to breed resentment. It's kinda cool to kindle the underdog. Instead of buy low sell high, the strategy behind donating and encouraging others to donate _(to these underdog would be Prince Regents)_ is instead to just buy low and then get nothing out of it other than winding up a clockwork mouse and seeing what happens in future, with a sprinkle (just a sprinkle mind) of choas.
Don't get me wrong. I will (and did) donate to larger groups like Mozilla, and buy and encourage others to buy Raspberry Pi Foundation gear and the like. There's just something kind of strategic _(and perhaps a self-amusement kick)_ in reminding these well made large collaborative projects that they don't get to be better or bigger than the lone wolf dude. It's a chance also at revisionist history like how it should have been the Sinclair Spectrum instead of the BBC Micro that got the prize, and the gamers reminded the BBC _(Literacy Program with interest from the Government)_ who really "won" because basically nobody bought a BBC Micro for home and everybody bought a Spectrum instead. So Clive Sinclair was the cool guy. He wasn't pushing for it to be a gamers machine per se and became a rebel icon. The Speccy was so wonderfully obdurate, sort of like the DemoScene.
My motives are not about nurturing the vulnerable individual but instead about disproportionate adulation and prepping as an exercise in futility. If anything, the weak must fear the strong. (Sir) Clive Sinclair got a knighthood.
I use GNOME a bit by always installing it but mainly switching to XFCE. KDE, like GNOME has some flashy features. I genuinely use these things when I have a computer with the horsepower to rn it. I gravitate towards XFCE more and part of the reason I use GNOME and KDE _(even though they are well made and useful to me)_ is to get other people to use them and then I'll go use XFCE and get my special peers to use XFCE when they want me to help them with setting up computers. By the time people have enough computing horsepower to run a fully customised GNOME and KDE desktop and its dependencies, a large amount of those people are running it in a VM on the excellent Micorsoft Windows Hypervisor anyway (Win10pro and so on).
My comment has no hate in it and I do no harm. I am not appalled or afraid, boasting or envying or complaining... Just saying. Psalms23: Giving thanks and praise to the Lord and peace and love. Also, I'd say Matthew6.
ironically as a long time linux user, Gnome (which i have not tried since maybe 3.8) is the ONE DESKTOP (not counting some lesser known options i dont know about) ... I avoid. Heck I even tried Ubuntu Unity 22.04 lately and liked it .. Gnome just doesn't fit me and the only way i can use it i basically am turning Gnome into a different DE. LXDE, XFCE, Mate, Cinnamon, Plasma 5, Budgie... all good with me.
I am NOT naming names but i know two Linux devs (I dont want to even give it away) that CANT STAND the I think they would say messy and in their view "the way Gnome does makes NO SENSE"
Heck in my view ... Cinnamon, Budgie, or even Mate is "what Gnome should be now" in my view.
And fortunately we have other options.
Gnome with dash to panel and arcmenu is the best. no contest.
GNOME does something different from other desktop envoriments.
- 6 month planned development cycles.
- UI, String, Code freezes.
- GNOME HIG
- Translation from Damned Lies.
- Documentation.
- Also, GNOME has a design team!
Good video. However on the funding point I think it is overplayed. A lot of the funding gnome foundation has collected for the past few years has been as escrow for others, such as outreachy. That funding isnt for gnome and without it on the sheets, the figures wont be to different than for KDE.
Well IF Gnome were having a better file manager than dolphin would like to switch right awayyyy
for me nautilus is much better..
It is most popular only because currently there is no better option. Hopefully cosmic DE will change that.
How about no?
Um, that's your opinion. I prefer KDE Plasma (even thought that's *my* opinion) and I do look forward to COSMIC.
"currently there is no better option"
There are several. Cinnamon, MATE, Budgie
I still prefer KDE plasma over gnome.
💀
Me too . KDE anyday
I think KDE is great, but I’ve found it doesn’t work well across multiple monitors
Me too. Been using Kubuntu for the last couple of weeks. So far so good.
So do I, geh-nohm has NOT won ... race is not even half way over!!! KDE for me, thanks
I thought it was mostly stability? I like the idea of KDE but its just wayyy too buggy. I can almost deal with it, but I cant imagine the average consumer would accept it
Simplicity is a good thing. For that reason alone, Gnome wins.
Go back in watch Linus Tech Tips, KDE is complicated and buggy. Gnome may not be as extensible, but it does what people NEED it to do, and it does it about as well as MacOS and Windows!
Using Linux has nothing to do with being able to code. You should be able to use Linux for anything you want, it is not supposed to be only used by programmers.
When Gnome when to 3.0 is where the left out the legacy computer users out there. Sure, there is Gnome classic.. but that not the point. You can design a great desktop manager and still make it low resource for everyone.
I hater gnome but it grows on u over time and now i have it on my laptop and desktop (tv box)
I think of GNOME like my phone.
I can understand you, but I prefer Mint Cinnamon!
Nothing can "win" as a desktop, with linux the choice of desktop is up to preference, gnome just happens to be the most similar to "modern desktops of apple and Microsoft." Thus it has been chosen to make it easier for people to switch to linux with a familiar-ish desktop
It is actually one of the desktops that is pretty far removed from the standard windows experience. Most competing DE’s function much more like windows out of the box
KDE has the better apps. Kate, ktorrent, konsole, dolphin are all great tools. I feel locked and unproductive when using gnome. And the gnome cycles are a pain! I'm using OpenSuse KDE now.
That old Qt license Fud again.
Most of the time I live Gnome but now It's too much heavy but I think it's heavy because of Lots of feature.
I can understand why this kind of desktop type will be useful for Linux in future.
And when you are not thinking negative these are good things.
Gnome won because:
- they absolutely love user suggestions!
- you can build complex Blender-like apps with new GTK
- we have beautiful new UI's for managing everything (like on Windows)
- there was no arrogance and ignorance towards community while Gnome was growing
- gnome color picker is perfect tool for every master artist
- there is no incompatibility with old GTK software
- they rebuild things over-and-over (but in a good way)
- it has "Activity" at left top corner
- KDE and other Linux toolkits render perfectly like they are part of Gnome desktop
Is this sarcasm?
👍for avatar
Ho ho ho ha ha ha ho ho ho he he ha
hello me old chum
I'm gnot a gnelf
I'm gnot a ganobblin
I'm a GNOME and you've been GNOMED!
I will anticipate the heated arguments this video will eventually have 🍿
simple and easy to use
I love Gnome 40
KDE is so much better IMO - it treats you like an adult and allows you to configure the system how you want to, and you don't need extensions (which break at every update) in order to have a usable desktop .
I use KDE on my desktop and Gnome on my laptop. And I'd be honest, as a production machine, Gnome excels once you have the workflow dialed down. It is basically MacOS but better. And due to its workflow and ease of use are the standard when it comes to professional Linux distros.
Yeah it sucks that you can't personalize it much, and sometimes a few extensions may break when updating Gnome, but usually they are updated within a day or less, if you aren't using an obscure, unsupported extension.
Also, companies lean more to use laptops now, and Gnome is pure bliss on laptops.
You just started a war with me... 😂😈
@@sharkuel Don't get we wrong, Gnome is now vaguely usable, but I could never use it for my work machine (a home laptop sure.) - but the fact people need to change their workflow to use it is a major problem.
For me it's not because i was so used to Windows that I gelled with KDE, I only used windows for 5 years (97-2002) and i hated it, coming from Amiga workbech (3.1) I found the whole system like the dark ages.
I like gnome bcoz it has simple ui..
I like Gnome cause my brain gets ovewhelmed with the options when things are too visually complex
I like Gnome because it makes a clean break from the windoze lookalike bandwagon.
I don't think gnome won anything. KDE plasma is on Steam Deck, not gnome. Plasma has improved a lot recently while at the same time working on big transitions like Wayland and qt 6 and with much less money than gnome. I think that next years will show that KDE are the best !
The good one
Gnome has been pushed because of political and ideological reasons. If people had to buy it, it would have gone out of business ages ago. When Microsoft came up with Windows 8 they had to recognize their idiocy and switch back to normal desktop. Gnome never had to do that. They just rammed down their stupid workflow vision down everyone's throats. When gnome 3 came out Linux desktop market share stopped growing.
Like no minimize and close buttons on windows. Can't save on desktop. No system tray. Useless bar on top that doesn't tell you what windows are open. What are they thinking? Sure I could eventually learn to use it but my poor ex wife never could. It's just pointlessly different.