Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: RonB <ronb02NOSPAM@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Fedora proposing to remove X11 Gnome
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2025 07:42:25 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 72
Message-ID: <slrn100ucb4.cuiu.ronb02NOSPAM@3020m.home>
References: <oG5OP.1820195$BrX.647879@fx12.iad>
 <slrn100kcgb.ds7.ronb02NOSPAM@3020m.home>
 <slrn100kfa7.edd.rotflol2@geidiprime.bvh>
 <1irOP.851750$d51.585824@fx46.iad>
 <slrn100mumt.dkd.rotflol2@geidiprime.bvh> <vuh558$11toh$3@dont-email.me>
 <slrn100obf3.pd6.rotflol2@geidiprime.bvh>
 <slrn100oj38.81kf.ronb02NOSPAM@3020m.home>
 <V74PP.2709395$OrR5.911761@fx18.iad>
 <slrn100rkkh.bh86.ronb02NOSPAM@3020m.home>
 <HTuPP.2635138$eNx6.1862988@fx14.iad>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2025 09:42:25 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="799a4b7c207b7f4dd695ac225581962d";
	logging-data="2929587"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+R+6F1xWljmKnk1AGXu4CV"
User-Agent: slrn/1.0.3 (Linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:hogECtgO/n4jVyuuCZPI7ZwPI9Q=

On 2025-04-27, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
> On 4/27/25 02:45, RonB wrote:
>> On 2025-04-26, CrudeSausage <crude@sausa.ge> wrote:
>>> On 4/25/25 23:00, RonB wrote:
>>>> On 2025-04-26, Borax Man <rotflol2@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 2025-04-25, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 25 Apr 2025 12:06:53 -0000 (UTC), Borax Man wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I understand the problems with X11, and supporting legacy, but you can't
>>>>>>> just throw out decades of work and break it because its hard.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Somebody has to come along and offer to do the work. If nobody does, then
>>>>>> yes, the existing developers are quite justified in saying “that’s not
>>>>>> worth it, let’s just drop it”.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> But they ARE doing work.  They're creating new stuff that lack some
>>>>> degree of compatibility with the old.  This is the problem, devs work on
>>>>> what the want to work on, not what people need.
>>>>>
>>>>> In no one was willing to work on free software, that would make sense,
>>>>> but people are working on reinventing the wheel again and again.  We
>>>>> also had Mir.  TWO projects. Duplication.
>>>>
>>>> Kind of like Ubuntu trying to force Unity on everyone because "they knew
>>>> better." Or Gnome making huge changes in Gnome 3 because they knew better
>>>> than the user what the *should* want. That's basically why Linux Mint took
>>>> off. Mate and Cinnamon were what a LOT of users wanted, not Gnome 3 or
>>>> Unity.
>>>
>>> In the end, a lot of people ended up liking Gnome 3's way of doing
>>> things, and it is at the core of a few desktop environments. As for
>>> Unity and Mir, I liked the interface of Unity enough to seek it out in
>>> Ubuntu's iteration of Gnome, and Mir was a step in the right direction.
>>> Had Wayland not already have been in development, I doubt people would
>>> have had such a negative opinion of Canonical's decision to move away
>>> from X11.
>> 
>> Not me. Never liked either Unity or Gnome 3. I also don't like that
>> customization of Gnome 3 was always an afterthought, with add-ons that broke
>> with each release. Gnome developers seemed to have had a "take it or leave
>> it," mindset. It's gotten a bit better over time but, still, when you ask
>> about moving the top bar to the bottom, and ask why Gnome 3 doesn't a
>> provide a method to do that, you get snarky responses claiming this the top
>> position is "somehow" superior. I don't like it there, it feels
>> "claustrophobic" to me. I always moved the Gnome 2 bar to the bottom. Add-ins
>> are supposed to fix this, but usually they only work for such and such
>> version and are often abandoned.
>
> You're right about the extensions. I abandoned the idea of using them 
> when I noticed that they ceased to function the moment the version of 
> Gnome increased.
>
>> As for X11 vs Wayland, not quite sure how that fits in the Gnome 3 and Unity
>> vs Gnome 2 debate.
>
> It's not the same debate but a similar one. People hated on Mir simply 
> because Canonical introduced it. The company is apparently not allowed 
> to introduce its own technology if the community already developed 
> something similar. For example, Snap is hated even though it came out 
> before Flatpak did and is an improvement on AppImage. I'm not a fan of 
> Snap myself (I prefer Flatpak because of the software library and how it 
> updates), but I can't say that it's bad.

I think the reason that people don't like Snaps is because Canonical made 
the Snap servers proprietary, under their control. It goes against the whole 
point of Linux, that it be open source. And I don't agree that Snaps are 
better than AppImages. I prefer AppImages over both Snaps and Flatpaks.

-- 
Jesus sat with sinners: He didn't sin
with them. Know the difference.