Yes! It's all about personal preference. I can't even read the whole post, it's so long.
When First Zorin out it was Gnome. I cannot complain it is bad. Besides if you using any linux distribution you need always using a terminal where everywhere is the same. Depends on drivers and software what you need to installing. That for daily users it is ok if he don't to much trying changing many options what could be changing,remove some package from original Zorin distribution. We have on this forum some topic where people going some guide lost desktop or any data files. Besides what is it the problem when you login you can install any DE what you liked. I saw last time in customization good guide
2 Likes
I think you angered Athena (the Goddess of knowledge, wisdom and education) for getting her name's spelling wrong. 
Me too!
2 Likes
Well that is sometimes mistakes i mean Athena and Zeus but a battle and some words can gived a humoristic. So Gnome looks like more modern DE but XFCE could be a poor on start but can easier changing DE to another. Example last time when I using Cinnamon what is a fork Gnome. Fedora using Gnome 41.2
I reading Zorin is a release version update not a rolling like arch what gived you newest updates but not checked with security what could gived you unstable that why ubuntu is stable edition.
Everyone from you can gived answear why I choice Zorin? Many distribution linux have a Gnome DE. I am example with Zorin because i have proof how it evolved from lower version cd plate before 15.3 ultimate. Many youtubers sayed the Zorin is best distro 2021.
2 Likes
I’m counting on you when the “summarize this topic” button appears at the top of the thread.
1 Like
I think Gnome is a great DE! I don't understand why you guys say Gnome is not polished, it really is. Gnome is very beautiful and clean design, even though it's not the most flexible. It looks amazing and a lot of people use it.
Arch Linux shows that most people in Arch use KDE, so KDE is more popular than Gnome in Arch I guess.
If KDE died (which will basically never happen, I will probably go to Gnome ngl.
3 Likes
I have outlined exactly why repeatedly. Across several posts.
It is perfectly fine if a user prefers or enjoys Gnome. However, the issue that I raise in this thread is not about whether a user enjoys and uses Gnome.
It is about Gnome being Represented by many users in a certain way, even as many users belittle other D.E.'s by calling them Ugly or Outdated. This thread is not about gathering opinions about this, but rather, confronting that misrepresentation.
Many users say they like or prefer Gnome due to its simplicity. That is fine and if they prefer it, that is fine. However, many of us Linux users do not feel the need to give up control for simplicity and the problem becomes where your preferences are forced on ALL of us due to Gnomes control over the GTK (Gnu ToolKit).
GTK4 creates that same simplicity across ALL D.E.'s excepting KDE.
If you want no settings and simplicity, that is fine. You shouldn't enable it being forced on everyone else. It only makes fair sense that many of us should be able to address these heavy concerns without being misrepresented or belittled by others.
And for those that say this is disparaging to Zorin Core - it is Not: Evidenced by the sheer number of Gnome-Extensions that the ZorinGroup needed to include and tweak into Zorin Core to make it what it is today.
1 Like
Nor have you called it Ugly or Outdated. But a great many others do. This thread is not about you, but about a community as a whole, that words things in a particular way.
I agree with a great deal of your positions and statements on this. So please keep in mind that as I address the words of the community, it does not reflect solely on you.
Several of the members posting in this very thread have done so in other threads, including @Kedric .
Is gnome exclusive to Work Environments and Employers? In fact... I am pretty sure I already asked this question.
Do the many home users need to be treated as though their home machine is a workbench?
Most importantly, does the direction gnome is taking with the GTK (Toolkit) affect everyone (Excluding KDE which uses the Qt toolkit)? This is the most important question.
I would term this more as, I hope all readers will question their assumptions and examine the opinions for merit. It is not enough to just assume... with the direction things are taking, users must be educated and aware.
I cannot find any thread with that title.
You know... you say you believe others should voice their opinions... as long as it isn't me voicing mine, right?
I repeat (YET AGAIN) that the issue is NOT about people "hating" Gnome, but rather: The Direction Gnome Development is taking Afects us all.
And I, for one, would deeply appreciate it if you stopped with the shifting goal posts and red herrings.
You keep misdirecting the topic in order to align it to your own goals. Up to and including a massive misdirection in regards to another member and your personal attacks on that topic.
(In this, you can see clearly, yet again, that editorializing is not needed. I put forth the same repeated point, preferring no misdirection from others making personal accusations- That the direction of Gnome is changing the gnu toolkit that most other D.E.'s all use and is affecting ALL desktops, not just changing only Gnome.
1 Like
I keep seeing words "modern", "polished" related to a DE.
Well, Art Deco is considered by some to be a "modern" look.
"polished" shoes can shine and look good, but I have never had to wax a DE to get it to shine.
I think those two words are not best used to describe a DE, (IMO anyway).
3 Likes
This discussion going to anywhere. Words and proof is like a science where someone gived experience. Then best conclusion is connect words with some examples photos to showing diffrents between gnome and xfce or another DE with describe.
2 Likes
Epiphany Browser is a Gnome Application - a Web Browser aimed toward simplicity and Security.
It handles security quite well, though there is nothing in the application that will inform you of such or let you modify that.
As a themer, you would think I would love Epiphany Browser, because it follows the gtk theme I make for it exactly, unlike other browsers.
Yet, I do not. In fact, the opposite.
It has almost nothing in the way of settings.
It comes preconfigured and what you get is what you get and you can like it or like it.
Looking at other Popular Preferred browsers, we will find Firefox, Chromium, Brave and Vivaldi.
Not only do these work as preconfigured, they come with a literal ton of settings. Perusing the Support forums for any of those browsers, you see User Requests For More Settings. More Control.
Why does this odd disparity exist? Why do we see, in evidence, that users clamor for more settings and that the preference is geared toward more settings?
I mean... I do not know about you but... I do not know all the settings in any of the above browsers and I have used them all. There are so many of them. And you can even enable "Experimental" on most of those browsers for even more settings to control.
By the logic outlined across many posts in this thread... Epiphany Browser should rank among the Top Browsers. Especially among Gnome users.
Yet, it ranks Dead Last, not even falling into its own category, simply being listed in with other small browsers under "Other"
This disparity and its distinction are important.
Across this forum, I have often praised Zorin OS Core, particularly Zorin OS 16 Core as it added so many missing features and user ability. It is a mark of Zorin OS that the OS aims to make things easy, not necessary to make things Simple.
Where Gnome, at its base, is quite featureless and lacking in user control, Zorin OS goes to great lengths restoring user control, using multiple Gnome Extensions to restore right click functionality with the Panel (Taskbar) and Desktop icons - as well as some enjoyable fun like Magic Lamp effect and Wobbly Windows. These are easy to use... But not the hallmark of Simplicity.
Clearly, anyone who claims I am knocking Zorin OS Core is making a false statement.
Using Zorin OS Core, Zorin OS Lite, or using Brave Browser, Vivaldi Browser, Chromium... they all attest to users desire for Control over their Own usage and machine.
In the future, ZorinGroup must address having to request permission from Gnome (as libadwaita currently stands) along with POP_OS, Mint, and other distros, get a sign-off for using their own distro Theme.
This is not the case, now... But it is the case for the future. Unless... We, the users, are willing to speak up, be aware of this direction - and Hold Gnome Accountable for FOSS and Freedom.
Misdirection by belittling one who voices this will change nothing - and we all, not just Gnome Desktop users, will be affected.
The personal attacks and misdirection need to stop. The topic is valid. Addressing the question as to whether or not it is user-friendly to take these directions of more removals of user control is valid. It is relatable that any and all members of a discussion forum can and should voice their concerns over such a direction, since those users will be impacted even if not using Gnome.
And Core and Gnome users will be affected as Gnome moves forward to eliminate the Gnome-Extensions that so many users need and rely on and... enjoy.
How long must we wait before this happens and the users finally address this? In the meantime, villianizing anyone who dares speak up now?
I remember about gnome they are not interesting implementation a people ideas. They are going to closing they rules. It was somewhere here before topic about gnome, maybe moderators can find and put that here.
There are many and I linked to one of them in post #52.
But a net-search over reddit, ubuntu-forums and anywhere else, covering many years even... will yield the same. It's not a matter of relayed opinion: The Gnome Developers Themselves have voiced their position clearly on message boards saying that Gnome does not consider User Requests, repeatedly. It's an easy search and the record stands in print.
Just as pointing out the evidence that gnome applications follow different structure - rounded all four corners on some apps, but not on others, titlebars mismatched and differently sized (I mean, you can find hundreds of threads on forums all over the web seeking answers to this), Gnome-Boxes app stretching header separator margins while Nautilus does not stretch them - stands by its own merit, viewable and testable independently by anyone. Gnome and Gnome-based Desktops are the only desktops that do this. No other desktops (Including MS Windows) have these unpolished artifacts. None of them.
Merit and Evidence... Works much better than attacking the poster with personal accusations.
2 Likes
Yes! That's is true. I reading many news about that and I can agree.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3D1-QazWIUcQs&ved=2ahUKEwiNw6e4mpT1AhUHvYsKHSUxCt4QwqsBegQIEhAB&usg=AOvVaw2KiHgGUrzVJHHMEymKDT4r about Epiphany but Vivaldi have more settings and is more friendly for users. Brave using tor like a some version Firefox.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://windowsreport.com/epiphany-browser/&ved=2ahUKEwit5ITDnJT1AhX7AxAIHW1DBKcQFnoECAQQBQ&usg=AOvVaw2EcEXxe6AYcGMMJKLuwQWE
All D.E.'s come pre-confgured. It means the same exact thing as what you said you mean by it. As in, boot up and start using.
So, please explain how Gnome is different- how does it halve the set up that a user must make? Details. Show screenshots if you like. Demonstrate any merit to this claim.
You are saying that other desktops require as much as Twice as Much configuring for the average user just to be used.
On other D.E.'s like Mate, XFCE, Cinnamon, LXQT...
What requires configuring in order to use the desktop and how does Gnome handle this differently, to as much as Half as much configuring being necessary to use the desktop?
1 Like
Yes Every part of GNOME is designed to make it simple and easy to use . A simple way to access all your basic tasks. A press of a button is all it takes to view your open windows, launch applications, or check if you have new messages.
While some may find this not to their particular liking and they are entitled to their choice, many users are looking for something to rely on to serve as a simple way to enjoy surfing and daily tasks.
I think that some and not all former users have decided that Gnomes direction of going was not to their liking and become ill of the DE. Hence, taking every chance to discredit it.
Nothing is perfect, but Gnome is easy to use and friendly to those that decide to have something Linux.
This is true for activities overview. But is that all it takes to access information or details that a user needs?
I will give an example:
@Frog removed a piece of software using gnome-software. Seems direct and easy, right?
But since the application does not inform you of any dependencies it removes along with that software - the way that other D.E. package managers, the way Synaptic or the way Terminal does - he was unaware that it removed the entire Zorin Desktop along with it.
He got quite a shock when he tried to log in later.
I would point that most all D.E.s make it simple to access your basic tasks. On almost any D.E., for many purposes a push of a button is all that is needed to access certain things. And there is plenty in Gnome that is very difficult to access, too.
If you point to Gnomes activities overview, I can point to XFDashboard, just as easily. This does not mean that Gnome is not user-friendly by itself, but instead shows that it is not especially so.
Granted, the Gnome-Software example was just too easy to use as an example...
But it is one of many cases, others including the "Oh No! Something has gone wrong" error, that are not user-friendly at all and are difficult to troubleshoot.
I would be curious as to other exmples that may be provided to show how Gnome makes easy use - that are actually due to Gnome-extensions. Since you only provided one example to support your statement, I do not have much to go on.
This is a very good point. I can see that as quite likely going on.
However, I have outlined a great many examples through the course of this thread that address how I question the selective pressure placed as Gnome being promoted as "More advanced" or "The most polished" or the many other common comments made.
This is not to discredit Gnome as a whole, but to create more equal footing as to how Gnome is perceived to new users that otherwise would not know either way.
Gnomes direction affects all D.E. users excluding KDE. This is not about users trying to merely discredit Gnome, but to question support that enables that direction that will affect us all.
1 Like
This is not totally fair, Gnome did try to make their applications have a bit more options. They fixed many bugs in the Gnome Software Store and made it much responsive. I think the redesigned look is very clean, and I think is far more improved.
2 Likes
When did they do this? Do you have a link to the gnome changelog on this? What applications have more options?
And most importantly... Why did Gnome put in these options? Did they do this because of User Feedback requesting less simplicity and more control, more settings?
What I pointed out above is 100% fair. What happened to Frog happened recently and currently - as of Today - Gnome Software Does Not notify users as to dependencies being removed.
There is nothing unfair in that example - at all.
None of the above means that Gnome is a bad desktop and it does not mean that Gnome Software is evil or anything.
The only thing it means is that it is not the Top of the line, most polished and most advanced desktop as I keep commonly coming across claimed.
This is not defensive, but instead; is important for new users to Linux to have access to these details to consider - instead of it remaining a one-sided "Promote Gnome but neglect any flaws" as it is now.
...Also... how do you define it looking clean? I mean... I just opened Gnome-Software and it looks exactly the same as it always has. What does "clean" mean?
1 Like