Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 28th Nov 2012 16:32 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 543567
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.
Like I said above, I don't care that they changed or progressed. But when the devs go out of their way to make sure you can't change the desktop from the way they want it, then they are going too far. There is no reason why Gnome couldn't ship the desktop the way they want it, but still make it easy for people to change it to their needs. Instead, they did the opposite, to preserve branding. That way you always know a Gnome desktop when you see it.




Member since:
2006-05-18
That's interesting, but do those people see themselves using Gnome 2 in another 10 years? What about progress?
From what I've read about the subject, I've got the feeling that the devs wanted to appeal to a broader audience. Unfortunately, it seems that all they've managed to do was just to drive away the audience they had.
I think Cinnamon should have been a Gnome 3 project (the fallback option).
Edited 2012-11-29 16:04 UTC