Hacker News Reader

Comment by deltasevennine | Hacker News Reader

True, however user experience in windows is still superior.

Comparing Gnome to Windows 10/11? No way.

I would pick the unholy abomination that is ExplorerMetroUWP in Windows 10/11 over GNOME any day of the week. GNOME is nigh unusable other than as an expensive piece of wall decor.

>GNOME is nigh unusable other than as an expensive piece of wall decor.

Examples you can expand on?

Not the user you're replying to, but some workflows just don't work well in Gnome (yet).

But the combination of key shortcuts and mouse gestures makes it feel really nice to use in practice. Workspaces work like I'd expect, as do Alt+Tab and Alt+`. The built-in apps and settings have a level of consistency the Windows team could only dream of right now. Notifications in Gnome are fantastic. I could go on.

Lack of customization for one, either I do things the GNOME way or the highway. Screw that, if I wanted that I would be using MacOS and/or iOS instead since Apple does that far better.

Form factor dissonance for another. GNOME clearly targets the mobile form factor, and it fails me for all the reasons Metro in Windows 8 failed me because guess what: I'm using a desktop/laptop, not a tablet/phone.

Yeah if you value customizability at all, you should probably be using kde. I value simplicity and consistency.

I had issues with ubuntu's unity back in the day and I switched over to i3wm, but I didn't find I used tiling enough to make it worth losing the usability of a desktop environment

> GNOME clearly targets the mobile form factor

I think it's more fair to say all form factors are treated equally, to the possible detriment of focusing exclusively on desktop. I think Gnome does well and is really versatile no matter which form factor you use, and I didn't have much issue moving from Gnome 2 to 3, or Windows to Gnome, or OSX (at the time) to Gnome (I've gone back and forth a lot over the years).

For me, workspaces (which Windows lacked natively until very recently) and Alt+Tab/` are how I get around.

The customizability argument is a solid reason to dislike Gnome, but not for all time. Things do get better each release. Well, except for extensions, which always break.

About configurability, I installed more than a dozen shell extensions and my Gnome desktop looks like and behaves like what a desktop should be for me, quite distant from the ideas of Gnome's developers.

Metacity works for me, nice standard look

Yes. The UX is much better. Linux customization capabilites are phenomenal I give you that, but it takes a very big amount of time if you want something specific for you, and when an update hits and things just break :-(

Gnome actually has a different philosophy. There wasn't much customization offered at first, as the focus was on nailing a single set of UX and aesthetics. And I think the Gnome team succeeded, but the lack of customization is/was divisive.

Use XFCE, put your panels however you want them, done. Haven't ever had any update break my arrangement.

I use Linux for my homeserver, and used to have it on my HTPC too. On the HTPC I only used openbox, so in a sense it's even less complicated than xfce. The trouble is with the software for the htpc stuff, like remote gaming, audio, videoplaying retrogames software and so on. The part that ruined my experience is the amount of configuration needed to get there, and updates that constantly broke either my video player, the audio or the remote gaming. Either a driver update with a breaking change, or the audio config that needed repair and stuff like this. Everytime I'd spend obscene amount of time to try to find what's the culprit, and it usually came down to updates breaking one thing or another. On windows it's seemless and in some ways with better performance and ease of installation. Up and running in 15 minutes and with total control to boot...

Ehh that's a big claim. As mainly a windows user (adobe software) both gui and env wise I way prefer Ubuntu over windows. It's so much clearer

Try Linux Mint. It uses Cinnamon and Cinnamon is very similar to Windows and without all of the baggage

I'm a linux user. I use nixOS and Arch. I've also tried mint many times.

I'm trying to be as unbiased as possible. As good as linux is and as much improvements that have been made over the past decade or so, Windows and OSX still have the superior GUI. Just being honest about it.

Windows GUI still has the same bugs that it had in Windows XP.

The whole system control panel has been dumbed down so much, that it actively tries to prevent the user from finding certain settings. The system still suffers from simply doing everything slower than GNU/Linux. After logging in, it acts as if all is loaded and ready, but when one wants to do something, things still get loaded and icons added "next to the clock". Right click in file browser still feels slugish. Windows stops me from doing the simplest things by asking me silly questions, of whether I want to do, what I just told the system to do.

Very specific to my systems: The closed source graphics card driver crashes often, while the open source drivers have not a single time crashed noticably on GNU/Linux. On Windows this is noticable, because the whole screen freezes, until the driver has restarted. Never happened on any of my GNU/Linux systems.

It is simply not funny or justifyable any more.

Ubuntu gui > windows by a large margin

Reply on news.ycombinator.com