Sunday, September 25, 2011

Gnome users are revolting IV

Here's one Gnome user who is definitely revolting:
Reactions across the Internet were virtually identical with one fine division; users who were using Gnome 3 in a production environment or had use cases that required them to maintain a productive work-flow were completely hampered by the experience while the much smaller class of adventurous casual users thought that it was pretty and offered enough bling for them to impress their friends with.
I have to say I don't recognise myself from the description. Is this claim based on some sort of scientific survey, or just pulled from the author's behind? Certainly there are a lot of anti-Gnome 3 reviews on the internet, but there are some good ones too.

Here are a couple of examples.

Two reasons Why Jim Nelson Likes GNOME 3 Shell:
Stability – Considering this is an initial release, I’ve found the Shell to be remarkably stable. I’ve had no freezes or crashes. While that seems like a low bar to overcome, this is essentially an 0.1 release. Not much 0.1 code can make the claim that it’s stable. Most 0.1 code is just happy it compiles.

Productivity – I should list this first, but I decided to save the best for last. My productivity has jumped since I switched to GNOME 3 Shell. This might be a highly subjective evaluation. I suspect I’m not alone.
No, you're not. Jack Wallen likes it too. Here are a couple of examples of the 10 things he's grown to love about GNOME 3:
1: Minimalism I have always been a minimalist. No icons, no widgets, no nothing. I want a clean desktop, and GNOME 3 offers about as clean a desktop as you can get without running E16. The only object on the desktop is the panel — until you reveal the launcher. But just because GNOME 3 takes a minimalist approach doesn’t mean it’s not easy to use. In fact, once you get used to it, it’s one of the easiest to use desktops you will come across.

7: Compositing The compositing of GNOME 3 is elegant and far from overstated. Instead of going the Compiz route, GNOME 3 opts for subtle use of transparency and a few simple, clean effects that highlight how a compositor can actually improve the efficiency of a desktop. Transitioning between windows or in and out of the Dash is about as graceful a transition as can be had on a computer desktop. Best of all, the compositor on GNOME 3 does not, in any way, take a hit on the performance of the machine. GNOME 3 compositing is so much in the background, you will hardly notice it doing its thing.
Gnome 2 is a Windows 95 paradigm. It's inefficient and redundant. Put a quick launch icon on the panel and it will launch the application, but it won't let you switch to it or tell you what that application is doing. No you can't minimise windows in Gnome 3, because it doesn't have a crowded and unreadable bottom panel. No, Gnome 3 isn't perfect, but it's already getting better.

I'm sure there must be more people like me who love the elegant efficiency of Gnome 3. Let's make out voices heard!


  1. When Gnome 3 was released I left a comment somewhere on the web saying, isn't it about time we moved on from "the Windows 95 paradigm"? Glad someone else thinks so too. Me? I love Gnome 3 - went back to Gnome 2 briefly, and missed 3 sorely.

  2. Just installed Gnome 3 after reading many angry posts.
    I am using Unity hence Gnome 3 is somewhat similar. But Gnome 3 is growing on me. I like its minimalism, simplicity and focus on current task.

  3. I despise Gnome 3. I despise Mac style domination of the entire workspace for every app. I despise spending 10 times as long switching between instances and apps. I despise googling for things on my own *@# computer. I despise auto hide. I despise dumb down big fat icons for apps instead of hierarchical menus.