[clug] GNOME 3 in trouble according to El reg. True or a beat up?

[jhock]

I've been using Ubuntu for about five years and really liked the Gnome
1/2 interface. It was easy to use with all the menus that I wanted. I
tried to use Unity when it came about. In fact I persevered for about
three months with Ubuntu 12.04 but eventually I got sick of the Unity
interface and went to Gnome 3. It's not as nice as Gnome 2 and needs
lots of work to get it back to the Gnome 2 type workings.

Maybe I should look at Cinnamon as others have suggested on this email
thread. If Gnome 3 doesn't give me the Gnome 2 interactions then I will
switch across but I'm lazy and with stick to Gnome 3 until I get really
frustrated with it.

Thanks list for all the great suggestions.

John

On Tue, 2012-11-06 at 06:18 +1000, Andrew Janke wrote:
> Nope.
> 
> But probably should. For me it's about using something that will have
> a long term development path. I used to like fiddling with a million
> config files (even wrote my own launcher thing in X11 years back), not
> so anymore.
> 
> MATE (as a fork of GNOME) does look good but I wonder if they can keep
> up all the good work maintaining their own fork of nautilus, evince,
> etc.
> 
> So for me it's about the path of least resistance, when things change,
> I first attempt to retrain myself to use the new defaults/WM and if
> not then I find ways around them (such as what I sent before!). This
> probably isn't the "linux way".
> 
> That and I like desktop eye candy, this probably comes from my Apple
> IIe/Mac Plus/Mac SE/30 heritage.
> 
> 
> a
> 
> On 6 November 2012 05:58, Carlo Hamalainen <carlo.hamalainen at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Have you tried the MATE desktop?