Linked by Antonio Ospite on Fri 21st Oct 2011 23:35 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 494053
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, 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:
2006-11-19
1) It feels so much unpolished than GNOME 2.
2) Its name is stupid, to the point of calling it "Shite" much better...
I so agree, xfce is perhaps the stupidest name I've ever heard, how the F@!k do you pronounce it, is it "x-force" ??? So, yes, calling it 'shite' would be better because at least people know how to pronounce it. And WTF is it with that stupid rat.
I really can't understand switching to xfce, just use fallback mode is you can only understand how to deal with a Windows95 UI clone.
FWIW, I never cared for Gnome 2.x precisely because it was basically a clone of Windows 95, I much preferred Gnome 1.x as it was more CDE like. Anyway, I really do like Gnome3 for the most parts, finally, we have a new and nice interface that is NOT a clone of Windows 95. My only gripe with Gnome 3 is the lack of a built in configuration editor, its lame that you have to install Gnome Tweak Tool (GTT). At the least, the GTT developers should work on geting it to be a control panel icon / extension / pref pane (not sure about the internals of the Gnome control panel).