Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 28th Sep 2012 20:44 UTC
Permalink for comment 536998
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/18/13 11:21 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/16/13 9:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/15/13 22:44 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/14/13 18:22 UTC, submitted by MOS6510
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2009-06-30
I am a big fan of Xfce myself but the problem lays elsewhere.
We used to have a major popular desktop - Gnome 2 that was seen by all new Linux users. It wasn't perfect but it was adequate and it became a de-facto standard Linux desktop. That standardization was perhaps its biggest achievement.
We know what happened later. The desktop has been abandoned by its developers. Worse, by making Gnome 3 explicitly incompatible with Gnome 2 they have effectively killed the latter. Yes, there is Mate but (1) it no longer has the support Gnome 2 enjoyed, (2) it is 3 years behind in development (2 years for development of Gnome 3 plus 1 year for renaming all components so that they don't clash with Gnome 3).
Yes, we can say we still have Xfce (I've been using it even in Gnome 2 days because in many was it was better than it), Mate, Cinnamon, KDE, LXDE, E17 and, yes, Gnome 3 and Unity. But we no longer have that ecosystem Gnome 2 was.