@ernie there used to be a plugin called 'GIMPshop' that styled GIMP to look more like Photoshop, and that was incredible. Of course, Adobe DCMA'd it, as was the style at the time.
@andybaio@ernie it’s wild to me that they still have so many words dedicated in their FAQ to the name being problematic.
Sadly without an organization behind the project they’re never going to change. Free software is plagued by problems like this and is held back as a result.
I'm a #MATE user, by the way (continuation of #GNOME2). So far, it's the only #DesktopEnvironment I've used extensively. Perhaps some day I'll try #GNOME.
@robertoqs I understand why GNOME 3 was such a dramatic change and why it went so unloved for so long. It’s pretty polished at this point, though, and I think that if you’re asking for that kind of experience it has a lot of benefits.
Would you be able to say more about why it was dramatic? I know it was, but I'm not sure why. Resource consumption? Excessive GUI changes? Becoming too similar to KDE Plasma? Using non-libre components?
I have an impression it might be all of those, but I don't know. I started using #GNULinux (specifically #ArchLinux) very recently by comparison to the history of #GNOME.
@robertoqs They essentially took a very common and well-understood interface dynamic and shifted it dramatically, and it wasn’t particularly ready for prime time when it first happened. In that way, GNOME was similar to the early versions of Mac OS X.
This. I started using Linux right at the transition from Gnome 2 to Gnome 3. From what I remember from discussions at the time Gnome 3 broke everybody's workflow, even Linus Torvalds! To add insult to injury it was more buggy and unstable, and was constantly changing so it wasn't guaranteed configurations a distro did would carry over to the next release, this is also why Mint decided it was better to make Cinammon rather than continuing to patch Gnome every new release.
Add comment