PDA

View Full Version : Why Unity, Cinnamon is much better



ctc33
May 9th, 2012, 01:03 PM
I'm not exactly a newbie to Ubuntu, I've played with it on and off for a couple of years but have never been impressed with either the Gnome or the Unity desktop. That's all changed now I've discovered Precise and installed the Cinnamon desktop. Cinnamon has a much better cosmetic appearance than either Gnome or Unity and is certainly more user friendly and more instinctive than Unity. It is my belief that Ubuntu would have a very good chance of rivalling Windows if Cinnamon became the standard desktop, anyone else agree ?

coffeecat
May 9th, 2012, 01:05 PM
Thread moved to Recurring Discussions.

thatguruguy
May 9th, 2012, 01:09 PM
I'm not exactly a newbie to Ubuntu, I've played with it on and off for a couple of years but have never been impressed with either the Gnome or the Unity desktop. That's all changed now I've discovered Precise and installed the Cinnamon desktop. Cinnamon has a much better cosmetic appearance than either Gnome or Unity and is certainly more user friendly and more instinctive than Unity. It is my belief that Ubuntu would have a very good chance of rivalling Windows if Cinnamon became the standard desktop, anyone else agree ?

Nope.

zeljkojagust
May 9th, 2012, 01:18 PM
Don't bother myself with "cosmetics" issue much (not at all to be honest), but Unity/Gnome 3.x is something I will have a hard time to get used to after accepting Gnome 2.x as the default. There is possibility of fallback to Gnome 2.x for now in new Ubuntu releases, but not sure if they will leave that option in future... so I rather use Debian for my desktops.

Morbius1
May 9th, 2012, 01:24 PM
Some random thoughts:

** Cinnamon would look silly on a phone, tablet, or TV

** It's called Unity because it doesn't look silly on a phone, tablet, or TV.

** Unity was built in-house by Ubuntu developers and anyone internally who would suggest that Ubuntu use Cinnamon as the default DE would have sugar dumped into their gas tanks.

** Linux penetration into the desktop has tripled since I started with Linux and is now somewhere around 2%. The war over the desktop is over. ( Although with Win8 - I'm not as confident as I use to be about that statement ).

** The desktop ( and by that I mean an actual desktop box - and I'll include laptops in that definition ) is dead. Everybody says so. I myself did not get the memo on that so like an idiot I recently purchased one of those 30 + pound behemoths complete with multiple terabyte + hard drives and useless things like DVD recorders in it :oops:

zeljkojagust
May 9th, 2012, 01:36 PM
@Morbius1 (http://ubuntuforums.org/member.php?u=982144) if desktops are dead, how will people who actually use computers for work (and not for showing off) perform their jobs? Tell me how one graphic designer, game developer, programer or a scientist will perform their duties? On a mobile phone or a pad? Not in so near future...

Sure, general user profile is someone who uses email client, web browser and a messenger, and Unity, new Windows 8, mobile phones and pads are perfect for those users. But there are still a lot of people who perform some serious work on their computers and they will always use desktops and workstations (at least until we will have a self aware "Star Trek" computer, something like Exocomp and will talk with it).

Morbius1
May 9th, 2012, 01:46 PM
First, sarcasm is a lost art.

Second, the focus is on content consumption not content creation. The people who actually create content use Macs.

surfer
May 9th, 2012, 01:52 PM
The people who actually create content use Macs.

sarcasm again?

zeljkojagust
May 9th, 2012, 01:57 PM
The people who actually create content use Macs.Right... (Laughing Out Loud!)
You're a funny guy Morbius1... sorry can't help myself.

surfer
May 9th, 2012, 01:59 PM
;)

qamelian
May 9th, 2012, 02:00 PM
sarcasm again?
Must be. I create content and I use Linux.

Version Dependency
May 9th, 2012, 04:18 PM
I'm not exactly a newbie to Ubuntu, I've played with it on and off for a couple of years but have never been impressed with either the Gnome or the Unity desktop. That's all changed now I've discovered Precise and installed the Cinnamon desktop. Cinnamon has a much better cosmetic appearance than either Gnome or Unity and is certainly more user friendly and more instinctive than Unity. It is my belief that Ubuntu would have a very good chance of rivalling Windows if Cinnamon became the standard desktop, anyone else agree ?

Cosmetic appearance? Huh? It's a just a taskbar at the bottom of the screen and a slab menu. That stuff has been around for ages. If I wanted that kind of desktop, I'd install XFCE...not a buggy, beta desktop that is fork of Gnome Shell. Or I'd use Gnome Fallback. Cinnamon serves absolutely no purpose.

pqwoerituytrueiwoq
May 9th, 2012, 04:26 PM
cinnamon still has a few bugs to work out, and a few missing features (like having 2 hot corners)
for example conky can mess up restoring windows from the panel
for now i think i will be using mate, but i will be keeping a eye on cinnamon

TBABill
May 9th, 2012, 04:43 PM
Cinnamon does not meet the goals of the Ubuntu devs to provide an interface that works across platforms. I find Cinnamon quite nice, especially considering it is a very immature product. I like it as an option, but it doesn't meet the long-range needs and goals of Ubuntu to land upon other devices as well.

I do find that Cinnamon takes the panel/slab menu and makes it far better to look at than a single panel Xfce environment, but that's my purely subjective opinion :)

cmcanulty
May 9th, 2012, 05:27 PM
gnome fallback uses gnome 3 and in xfce and fallback you can add as many panels as you want
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/precise/amd64/gnome-session-fallback

Roasted
May 9th, 2012, 05:45 PM
sarcasm again?

Was there any doubt?

Mikeb85
May 9th, 2012, 05:53 PM
First, sarcasm is a lost art.

Second, the focus is on content consumption not content creation. The people who actually create content use Macs.

While this is obvious sarcasm, OS X isn't a terrible OS for getting work done, if you ignore some of the ridiculous add-ons and focus on the OS itself.

VTPoet
May 10th, 2012, 01:06 AM
If I wanted that kind of desktop, I'd install XFCE...

Yeah, and if I wanted my desktop to look like a cellphone, I'd install Unity. And if I wanted my desktop to look like [insert derogative of choice], I'd install Gnome. And if I wanted my desktop to look like [insert snark of choice], I'd install KDE. (This message was written by an XFCE user, and I endorse it.) :popcorn:

wilee-nilee
May 10th, 2012, 02:05 AM
Better is a subjective, it is better for who ever says so.

Granted some suggest that life is a subjective state anyway, it seems that way to me.

dniMretsaM
May 10th, 2012, 02:13 AM
My opinion of Cinnamon is "Why?" GNOME-Shell is super extensible and can easily be made to look like Cinnamon without forking. Forking is sometimes a good thing, but I don't think it is in this case. The Cinnamon team should (imo) create a set of GNOME-Shell extensions instead of forking. Of course Cinnamon is fairly new (did it come out in December of 2011?), so it may bring something to the table as it matures, but so far it seems to be trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist.

CharlesA
May 10th, 2012, 02:51 AM
My opinion of Cinnamon is "Why?" GNOME-Shell is super extensible and can easily be made to look like Cinnamon without forking. Forking is sometimes a good thing, but I don't think it is in this case. The Cinnamon team should (imo) create a set of GNOME-Shell extensions instead of forking. Of course Cinnamon is fairly new (did it come out in December of 2011?), so it may bring something to the table as it matures, but so far it seems to be trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist.

This x 1000.

I just don't get the point of forking gnome 3 when it can be made to look the same.

wolfen69
May 10th, 2012, 03:46 AM
Yeah, and if I wanted my desktop to look like a cellphone, I'd install Unity.

Funny how my android phone looks nothing like unity. So they take a dock, move it to the side, and it's a cell phone like UI? <scratches head>

I'm beginning to believe that those people who think unity is cell phone-like, have never used a smartphone. There's little to no similarities whatsoever. It's funny how people that don't like unity will compare it to anything, just to justify their dislike of it.

I'm actually thinking about leaving the community because of this uncalled for, juvenile attitude. There's a lot of things I don't like in life, but you don't hear me complaining every day about the same things. As if that helps. I grew up, and just use what works for me without seeming like a whiner. I expected more from some of the long time posters here, but I guess that was asking too much.

craig10x
May 10th, 2012, 07:01 AM
don't leave, wolfen69...i'd miss your humor... ;)

by the way (especially for the unity haters) i found this thread very amusing:
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1976855

i think it makes the point that once you get USE to unity...the old way begins to seem weird...
assuming of course, you are willing to spend enough time to make the change (instead of spending it all complaining about it!)

Face-Ache
May 10th, 2012, 08:00 AM
Hmmm, maybe it's because i simply don't know any better (my only other real OS experience is Windows, and that ain't better :) ), but i'm personally loving the Unity desktop just as it is.

I have read that it was developed with the general user in mind, and as a general user, who is very much an amateur, i'm totally okay with that (I saw a friends Linux desktop in about 1998 - *shudder* it was petrifying!! - so much more accessible now).

As Craig says, I suppose it boils down to change; you get used to something, and then it changes to something else that barely resembles what you're used to, so you hate it because you don't know your way around the new interface, aren't very familiar with where to go to do stuff, etc.

Hopefully though, the more you use it, the better you get at it, the more you enjoy it.

Yeah, don't leave Wolfen - you like what you like, and if people can't abide with that, don't worry about it. If it works for you, be happy with it regardless of what others say :) Besides, i'll back ya up! :p

3rdalbum
May 10th, 2012, 09:00 AM
Funny how my android phone looks nothing like unity. So they take a dock, move it to the side, and it's a cell phone like UI? <scratches head>

I'm beginning to believe that those people who think unity is cell phone-like, have never used a smartphone. There's little to no similarities whatsoever. It's funny how people that don't like unity will compare it to anything, just to justify their dislike of it.

Unity has round rectangles around icons in the Launcher. Therefore, it's an OMGZ IPHONE RIPOFF!

I saw a round-rectangle signpost which didn't have any words, just a picture. OMGZ IT"S A SMARTPHONE SIGN.


I'm actually thinking about leaving the community because of this uncalled for, juvenile attitude. There's a lot of things I don't like in life, but you don't hear me complaining every day about the same things. As if that helps. I grew up, and just use what works for me without seeming like a whiner. I expected more from some of the long time posters here, but I guess that was asking too much.

Eventually, people will zip it about Unity. They did about the change to Network Manager, having a purple default wallpaper, "removing" Control-Alt-Backspace, etc. But the way people behave is getting me down too. People who never took the time to test 12.04 during development post a rant on the Testimonials forum claiming that it's "the new Vista" and that Canonical didn't do their job properly. Or proclaiming that, because a button's location has been moved, everybody is going to switch back to Windows and the location of the button will put off all potential new users.

It's nothing new. I suppose it's a problem with people, rather than a problem specifically with Ubuntu people. Look at the mass protests every time Facebook changes slightly. But Ubuntu Forums seems to collect the complaints 24/7, whereas you only get complaints on your news feed for a week on the rare occasion that Facebook changes.

I'm looking at removing Ubuntu Forums from my life. I've loved spending time here chatting, and I've especially loved helping people with their problems. It's satisfying to solve somebody's issue. I've occasionally had help given to me, too, which I really appreciate. It might be time for me to move on.

kevinmchapman
May 10th, 2012, 09:42 AM
I very much hope that neither of you are driven away by the whiners - you are stalwarts here and so much needed, but I can understand the reasons.

The fuss will die down. 12.04 is the beginning of the end of that fuss. Now that Unity is in an LTS release, pretty much everyone is now forced to face up to it.

About the Unity hate: Anyone who is not bright enough to tell the difference between Unity and a smartphone interface, is not going to be bright enough to cope with the leap from Gnome 2 to Unity. That may explain a lot....

Face-Ache
May 10th, 2012, 10:00 AM
Totally agree with kevinmchapman; long standing forum members, with upwards of 10,000 posts should not feel ostracised by a few haters. They're the vocal minority who just spend their time shouting louder than the rest of the perfectly-content-with-Unity masses who are busy enjoying this awesome piece of software.

To me, that sort of misdirecting hate speaks more about the person spouting it rather than the actual subject matter. It doesn't matter how good a product is, whatever that product, they'll always find some nit-picking reason to pour scorn on it.

Glass-half-empty kind of people.

Sad really. Ignore them :)

Irihapeti
May 10th, 2012, 10:29 AM
... I'm actually thinking about leaving the community because of this uncalled for, juvenile attitude. There's a lot of things I don't like in life, but you don't hear me complaining every day about the same things. As if that helps. I grew up, and just use what works for me without seeming like a whiner. I expected more from some of the long time posters here, but I guess that was asking too much.

That might hold the answer to your earlier question about why activity in the Community Cafe is way down. I've come to see it as the same old same old by people who are actually extremely lucky ... that they haven't much more serious things in life to worry about.

I've occasionally thought about leaving the community as well (not that my level of participation is anywhere near yours, so I doubt anyone would care), but realised that there's a more effective alternative: don't hang around the cafe or T&E. Also, anyone whose request for help includes a rant causes my ignore function to activate.

Occasionally, a week or so off does wonders for the state of mind. There's a whole wide world out there...

3rdalbum
May 10th, 2012, 10:52 AM
I've occasionally thought about leaving the community as well (not that my level of participation is anywhere near yours, so I doubt anyone would care), but realised that there's a more effective alternative: don't hang around the cafe or T&E. Also, anyone whose request for help includes a rant causes my ignore function to activate.

Yeah, maybe there should be an option for us old hands to remove the T&E and Cafe (and Recurring) forums from our display :-) I think I'd still find it tempting to visit. I do like seeing people's good experiences with Ubuntu, or even-handed and fair testimonials.

You've been around since 2007. That puts you into the lots-of-experience category. This community needs as many heavily experienced helpers as it can get!

cmcanulty
May 10th, 2012, 01:29 PM
Could someone post a tutorial or link on how to make gnome 3 appear like classic or is that the same as gnome fallback? I am testing all the options, though I can't get Unity to look right since I have fallback installed it looks like a hybrid mess of unity and fallback but non functional.XFCE also won't coexist with fallback they seem to see parts of each other on my laptop(HPG72t)

kurt18947
May 10th, 2012, 01:53 PM
My opinion of Cinnamon is "Why?" GNOME-Shell is super extensible and can easily be made to look like Cinnamon without forking. Forking is sometimes a good thing, but I don't think it is in this case. The Cinnamon team should (imo) create a set of GNOME-Shell extensions instead of forking. Of course Cinnamon is fairly new (did it come out in December of 2011?), so it may bring something to the table as it matures, but so far it seems to be trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist.

I believe Linux Mint did start out as an extension. The devs couldn't get where they wanted to go by using extensions, hence the decision to create Cinnamon. I added Cinnamon via the ppa leaving out muffin and so far so good. I think everyday users migrating from Windows XP would have an easier time with Cinnamon than they would with Gnome shell or Unity. The only poor choice I've seen so far in Cinnamon is printer administration. They chose to use the default app in Gnome 3 when IMO the app used in Unity and Gnome 2 is far more useful.


No, Cinnamon WOULD NOT work on a tablet or smart phone so I see Ubuntu/Canonical's reasoning. It's a point & click with a pointing device interface, not a tap/gesture-with-finger interface.

Morbius1
May 10th, 2012, 01:57 PM
My opinion of Cinnamon is "Why?" GNOME-Shell is super extensible and can easily be made to look like Cinnamon without forking. Forking is sometimes a good thing, but I don't think it is in this case. The Cinnamon team should (imo) create a set of GNOME-Shell extensions instead of forking. Of course Cinnamon is fairly new (did it come out in December of 2011?), so it may bring something to the table as it matures, but so far it seems to be trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist.
The guy that creates Mint said a while back:

As Lefebvre explained, “I’m not going to argue whether Gnome Shell is a good or a bad desktop. It’s just not what we’re looking for. The user experience the Gnome team is trying to create isn’t the one we’re interested in providing to our users. There are core features and components we absolutely need, and because they’re not there in Gnome Shell, we had to add them using extensions with MGSE [Linux Mint Shell Extensions for Gnome 3] (https://github.com/linuxmint/MGSE).”
MGSE is not enough though. Lefebvre continued, “The extension system in Gnome Shell is handy but core parts of a desktop need to be able to communicate with each others and be integrated properly. The Gnome development team is not interested in the features we implemented, it’s opposed to adding them to Gnome Shell, and it doesn’t share our vision of a desktop. In other words, our work on Gnome 3 does not influence the development of Gnome Shell, Gnome Shell isn’t going in a direction that is suitable for us, and we’re not interested in shipping Gnome Shell ‘as is,’ or in continuing with multiple hacks and extensions.”

I very much hope that neither of you are driven away by the whiners - you are stalwarts here and so much needed, but I can understand the reasons.

The fuss will die down. 12.04 is the beginning of the end of that fuss. Now that Unity is in an LTS release, pretty much everyone is now forced to face up to it.

About the Unity hate: Anyone who is not bright enough to tell the difference between Unity and a smartphone interface, is not going to be bright enough to cope with the leap from Gnome 2 to Unity. That may explain a lot....
Folks are dumb where I come from.
They aint got any learnin'
But they're as happy as can be.
A doin' a what comes naturally.

Me and maw and paw and all the rest of my kin use Xubuntu. I reckon we are all too stoopid to do that laepin' thing you talked about.

philinux
May 10th, 2012, 02:26 PM
I'm not exactly a newbie to Ubuntu, I've played with it on and off for a couple of years but have never been impressed with either the Gnome or the Unity desktop. That's all changed now I've discovered Precise and installed the Cinnamon desktop. Cinnamon has a much better cosmetic appearance than either Gnome or Unity and is certainly more user friendly and more instinctive than Unity. It is my belief that Ubuntu would have a very good chance of rivalling Windows if Cinnamon became the standard desktop, anyone else agree ?

If I wanted classic I would install gnome-panel and choose the classic session at login. Personally I'm very happy with the new.

You use what works for you. :cool:

CharlesA
May 10th, 2012, 02:27 PM
Could someone post a tutorial or link on how to make gnome 3 appear like classic or is that the same as gnome fallback? I am testing all the options, though I can't get Unity to look right since I have fallback installed it looks like a hybrid mess of unity and fallback but non functional.XFCE also won't coexist with fallback they seem to see parts of each other on my laptop(HPG72t)
I just installed gnome classic with:


sudo apt-get install gnome-panel

And selected gnome classic from the login screen.

VTPoet
May 10th, 2012, 02:38 PM
Funny how my android phone looks nothing like unity. So they take a dock, move it to the side, and it's a cell phone like UI? <scratches head>

I'm beginning to believe that those people who think unity is cell phone-like, have never used a smartphone. There's little to no similarities whatsoever. It's funny how people that don't like unity will compare it to anything, just to justify their dislike of it.

I'm actually thinking about leaving the community because of this uncalled for, juvenile attitude. There's a lot of things I don't like in life, but you don't hear me complaining every day about the same things. As if that helps. I grew up, and just use what works for me without seeming like a whiner. I expected more from some of the long time posters here, but I guess that was asking too much.

Um... tell me you didn't take my post seriously? You didn't, did you? :rolleyes:

mfZero
May 11th, 2012, 01:15 AM
I haven't played around with it yet, but now that we have a better Gnome fallback in 12.04, what would be the advantage for an Ubuntu user to install MATE or Cinnamon over it?

This is not a troll post or meant to start an argument--I seriously want to know.

ammofreak
May 11th, 2012, 01:58 AM
Hi ):P
I think it comes down to this platitudinous saying: different strokes for different folks.;)

Lucradia
May 11th, 2012, 10:22 AM
Must be. I create content and I use Linux.

And so do the guys behind this: http://www.bigbuckbunny.org/

Only the audio and some photomanip. magic I believe is done on mac if I recall? Rest is on Linux. They've obviously never played around with LMMS enough, or even hear of it as an alternative to sequencers like Garageband.

vandamme
May 11th, 2012, 07:42 PM
OK, I'm an olde fart and ex-Microsoft slave, I admit it. I also use a lot of different apps and can never remember what half of them are. So when I want to log into the server down the hall I open up the Cinnamon menu -> Internet -> Remmina. If I want to waste time when the boss isn't watching, Games -> LBreakout. Can I remember these app names? No, I cannot. And is it Evince or Document Viewer that opens PDFs??

thatguruguy
May 11th, 2012, 08:36 PM
And is it Evince or Document Viewer that opens PDFs??

either, as it turns out. That's the brilliance of the Dash. You don't need to remember the exact name. Type "Document Viewer" or "Evince"; either way, you'll get to the same program.

If I want to open a text editor, I can type "gedit" or "text" [actually, just "te"] or "editor" [again, typing "ed" is sufficient]. If you're looking under a menu, if you have to know:
1) which sub-menu the application is in, and
2) the name of the application.

When using the Dash, you just need to have an idea what you want to do. Want to see a remote desktop? Type "re" in the Dash, and you see the app. Easy-peasy. That, to me, is easier than remembering that I want to use an application named "Vinagre" [or "Reminna"] located in... which sub-menu is that, again?

wolfen69
May 12th, 2012, 06:55 AM
Hi ):P
I think it comes down to this platitudinous saying: different strokes for different folks.;)

I just wish most people would accept that fact. We're all different.

3rdalbum
May 12th, 2012, 10:33 AM
OK, I'm an olde fart and ex-Microsoft slave, I admit it. I also use a lot of different apps and can never remember what half of them are. So when I want to log into the server down the hall I open up the Cinnamon menu -> Internet -> Remmina. If I want to waste time when the boss isn't watching, Games -> LBreakout. Can I remember these app names? No, I cannot.

Well, Unity has a couple of options for you then. You can add them to the Launcher, or if you use them quite a bit they'll appear in the Home view of the Dash as recent items.

Or, for Remmina (it's a remote desktop client, right?) you can just start typing "desktop" and Remmina is one of the first items. Easy.

wilee-nilee
May 12th, 2012, 10:43 AM
I'm not exactly a newbie to Ubuntu, I've played with it on and off for a couple of years but have never been impressed with either the Gnome or the Unity desktop. That's all changed now I've discovered Precise and installed the Cinnamon desktop. Cinnamon has a much better cosmetic appearance than either Gnome or Unity and is certainly more user friendly and more instinctive than Unity. It is my belief that Ubuntu would have a very good chance of rivalling Windows if Cinnamon became the standard desktop, anyone else agree ?

No.

BigSilly
May 12th, 2012, 10:44 AM
No.

Me neither.

Gone fishing
May 12th, 2012, 11:58 AM
The Linux Action Show has had a review of Unity on 12.04 and Cinnamon on Mint. Generally the Unity review was more positive and they felt the Cinnamon fork of Gnome 3 was a mistake.

Interesting and worth a listen.

Prescilla
May 12th, 2012, 12:10 PM
Me neither.
No for me too.

BigSilly
May 12th, 2012, 01:50 PM
The Linux Action Show has had a review of Unity on 12.04 and Cinnamon on Mint. Generally the Unity review was more positive and they felt the Cinnamon fork of Gnome 3 was a mistake.

Interesting and worth a listen.

I did give that a listen. I love LAS, it's such a fun show and much less po-faced than other Linux podcasts. I agree with Bryan to a certain degree. Generally I don't see the point of forking from Gnome Shell for them. Surely everything they would need to do is possible in the Shell as is? I appreciate the changing nature of Gnome, but then if you are maintaining the extensions yourself what's the issue? Plus a lot of the extensions that they use are always updated. However, the main Mint dev claims he absolutely had to fork into something they could manage better and was more predictable, so what do I know?

But to my mind, you're going to have Cinnamon offering something that Gnome Shell users will be able to replicate anyway on their Gnome Shell desktops with various extensions. It just seems a lot of work for very little benefit. At least Unity is markedly different and unique, and warrants a separate existence from Shell.

Gone fishing
May 12th, 2012, 06:20 PM
I'm not exactly a newbie to Ubuntu, I've played with it on and off for a couple of years but have never been impressed with either the Gnome or the Unity desktop. That's all changed now I've discovered Precise and installed the Cinnamon desktop. Cinnamon has a much better cosmetic appearance than either Gnome or Unity and is certainly more user friendly and more instinctive than Unity. It is my belief that Ubuntu would have a very good chance of rivalling Windows if Cinnamon became the standard desktop, anyone else agree ?

No

I think Unity is the way to go, as it gives Ubuntu the chance of creating it own distinct identity and developing a consistent user experience. I feel there are issues but if the devs are not too arrogant (I don't believe they are) and listen to users concerns, I believe Ubuntu has a bright future as does the Linux desktop.

I'm not knocking KDE or Gnome 3 competition is good.

codingman
May 12th, 2012, 06:40 PM
If you hate unity so much, LOOK AT MY SIGNATURE!!! I'm really getting sick of these "I hate unity" threads, face the facts!

VTPoet
May 12th, 2012, 08:45 PM
I suspect that among those who dislike Unity, many more among them would like it if it were more configurable. I'm not sold on Cinnamon, but I like that it's more configurable than Unity. I also think Cinnamon would be better if it used Compiz rather than Mutter.

dniMretsaM
May 12th, 2012, 08:52 PM
I suspect that among those who dislike Unity, many more among them would like it if it were more configurable. I'm not sold on Cinnamon, but I like that it's more configurable than Unity. I also think Cinnamon would be better if it used Compiz rather than Mutter.

It actually uses Muffin, doesn't it (yes, I know it's very close to Mutter since it's a fork)?

jwbrase
May 12th, 2012, 11:41 PM
I suspect that among those who dislike Unity, many more among them would like it if it were more configurable.

Very much so, though it still has some fatal flaws that would mean I still wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole.

That said, I'm not extremely unhappy with Canonical deciding to develop and use a different DE, however much I hate it. They put out a distro, they have to figure out what sort of DE is the best for the greatest portion of their target demographic. That may not be the DE I prefer.

I'm more unhappy with the GNOME project suddenly deciding to put out such a radically different interface and drop support for their old one in such a short time frame. Unlike a project that puts out an entire distro (where many users may just switch out the DE upon install, or install a variant that uses a different DE) the user base of a project that puts out a DE has a considerable number of people who chose that DE because they prefer it over all others. Thus any non-incremental change in the workflow of your DE will have a significant number of users feeling they've been left in the lurch.

If GNOME had made sure they had the Gnome Classic interface working flawlessly on GNOME 3 without any significant regressions from GNOME 2 before releasing GNOME 3 (in the interest of which they probably should have made the transition with Gnome Classic still being the default in 3.0 and added Gnome shell in a later release), I doubt that either GNOME or Canonical would have faced nearly the amount of bad PR that they did with Gnome Shell / Unity.

jwbrase
May 12th, 2012, 11:57 PM
When using the Dash, you just need to have an idea what you want to do. Want to see a remote desktop? Type "re" in the Dash, and you see the app. Easy-peasy. That, to me, is easier than remembering that I want to use an application named "Vinagre" [or "Reminna"] located in... which sub-menu is that, again?

The Dash might actually be a workable concept if you could get it working on Gnome classic instead of under Unity (I'd have to experiment with it in such a setup to see how I liked it).

But with it being tied into Unity, you can't use it without that infernal dock, which is the misfeature that plays the biggest part in making Unity entirely unusable.

Hylas de Niall
May 13th, 2012, 12:10 AM
It's called progress. Moving forward. Branching out into newer fields while retaining a foothold where it started out.

I was uncomfortable with Unity in its early incarnations - there was a lot wrong with it - but now, well, now it's matured beautifully; It has made Ubuntu into much more than 'just another Linux distro'.

Ubuntu now has an identity all it's own. In a good way. Hell, even Distrowatch (which meant so much to some as Ubu page-hits fell) is showing an increase in Ubu popularity!

:)

It's still 'the shock of the new' IMO.

VTPoet
May 13th, 2012, 12:12 AM
But with it being tied into Unity, you can't use it without that infernal dock...

Yeah... the dock (launcher)... I feel the same way. I wish there were a way to uninstall it.

@ dniMretsaM You're right. Cinnamon uses Muffin, not Mutter. I hope Mint stocks it with as much flexibility as XFWM4 or Compiz - then I might consider switching back to a Gnome base.

GSF1200S
May 13th, 2012, 01:01 AM
Im getting sick and tired of people who are sick and tired of people speaking their mind about what they like or dont like. There is this mentality today that one's voice is to simply follow the dominant narrative of a given social sphere, else they are bemoaned for not "getting with the program." Were this to have happened throughout history, racial and sexist oppression would be more severe than today, wed still think the world was flat, etc. I dont try to take Linux too seriously, but seeing this anti-dissent attitude that permeates human society is ridiculous ESPECIALLY when it insults other people. "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism." If a person is not attacking you, then dont attack them for attacking an inanimate entity (linux, ubuntu).

How is an operating system supposed to provide human beings with a functional experience when every voice opposing the current design decisions are dismissed with ad hominem attacks like "whiner" etc? Part of what makes Linux amazing is the plethora of choices, AND the fact that the user base is so intricately exposed to the developer community. I get that we must try new things, and I get that one needs to give other ideas a chance before condemning them (I moved from Gnome to XFCE to Openbox- quite different approaches) , but there is a line; let people speak their minds, and in fact ENCOURAGE them to do so- human beings are social creatures, and communication is how we understand what our needs are as well as how effectively they are currently being met. I understand Ubuntu isnt a democracy, but at least consider the plight of many other distros that have gone by the wayside, primarily due to an alienation with their community.

You havent been reading complaints from me about Unity or Ubuntu simply because at this point I have moved on to a different target experience (not a better or superior one globally, but a better or superior one for me); that said, I will say that while linux desktop environments I certainly prefer to Mac or Windows, the sudden changes and feature-loss present in many current DEs is a cause for concern amongst us "dinosaurs" who still heavily appreciate and utilize the desktop paradigm.

And before I myself get attacked, consider that I always keep an Xubuntu install around; this is beyond distro selection- this is about the function of a community.

codingman
May 13th, 2012, 01:14 AM
Im getting sick and tired of people who are sick and tired of people speaking their mind about what they like or dont like. There is this mentality today that one's voice is to simply follow the dominant narrative of a given social sphere, else they are bemoaned for not "getting with the program." Were this to have happened throughout history, racial and sexist oppression would be more severe than today, wed still think the world was flat, etc. I dont try to take Linux too seriously, but seeing this anti-dissent attitude that permeates human society is ridiculous ESPECIALLY when it insults other people. "Dissent is the highest form of patriotism." If a person is not attacking you, then dont attack them for attacking an inanimate entity (linux, ubuntu).

How is an operating system supposed to provide human beings with a functional experience when every voice opposing the current design decisions are dismissed with ad hominem attacks like "whiner" etc? Part of what makes Linux amazing is the plethora of choices, AND the fact that the user base is so intricately exposed to the developer community. I get that we must try new things, and I get that one needs to give other ideas a chance before condemning them (I moved from Gnome to XFCE to Openbox- quite different approaches) , but there is a line; let people speak their minds, and in fact ENCOURAGE them to do so- human beings are social creatures, and communication is how we understand what our needs are as well as how effectively they are currently being met. I understand Ubuntu isnt a democracy, but at least consider the plight of many other distros that have gone by the wayside, primarily due to an alienation with their community.

You havent been reading complaints from me about Unity or Ubuntu simply because at this point I have moved on to a different target experience (not a better or superior one globally, but a better or superior one for me); that said, I will say that while linux desktop environments I certainly prefer to Mac or Windows, the sudden changes and feature-loss present in many current DEs is a cause for concern amongst us "dinosaurs" who still heavily appreciate and utilize the desktop paradigm.

And before I myself get attacked, consider that I always keep an Xubuntu install around; this is beyond distro selection- this is about the function of a community.

You are attacking others too who are just voicing there opinion, but, can anyone read the title of this thread? It does not say, "I Hate Unity", it just says that Cinnamon is a better option compared to Unity; Although I disagree, I believe people should be able to voice their opinions, except when it is truly attacking someone. One thing that people with over 1,000 points don't understand is that, they shouldn't take an opinion as a bomb, but as a way the Ubuntu community builds strength and a better OS, not make pointless statements such as a "crazy and whining attitude". I really hate unity, but at least it makes it more newbie friendly and if you're a power user or somethin', look at my signature, or go use some other distro.

GSF1200S
May 13th, 2012, 01:46 AM
You are attacking others too who are just voicing there opinion, but, can anyone read the title of this thread? It does not say, "I Hate Unity", it just says that Cinnamon is a better option compared to Unity; Although I disagree, I believe people should be able to voice their opinions, except when it is truly attacking someone. One thing that people with over 1,000 points don't understand is that, they shouldn't take an opinion as a bomb, but as a way the Ubuntu community builds strength and a better OS, not make pointless statements such as a "crazy and whining attitude". I really hate unity, but at least it makes it more newbie friendly and if you're a power user or somethin', look at my signature, or go use some other distro.

Im attacking the mentality of those who personally attack others for their perspectives; since I am doing so in response to ad hominem attacks (not logical attacks of their stated opinions but literally attacks of character) thrown at people who are voicing their opinions of Unity, Cinnamon, etc, I do not believe I am doing what I am speaking against. In other words, I dont attack someone personally for attacking Openbox (even though I love it); THIS is what I have a problem with. Chastising someone for labeling a dissenting voice a "whiner" is what needs to happen, otherwise everyone will be mean to one another which is in direct violation of what Ubuntu stands for (ideologically).


not make pointless statements such as a "crazy and whining attitude".
Exactly! Not only pointless, but unrelated to the criticism of (in this case) Unity instead focusing on attacking one's character. Its the mentality of not being open about our experience with Ubuntu that bothers me.

kevinmchapman
May 13th, 2012, 12:09 PM
Unity has been around more than 18 months, Gnome-Shell more than 12 months. Those "voicing there [sic] opinions" about Unity and Gnome-Shell after all this time are achieving what, exactly, apart from boring everyone on this forum? Gnome2 is dead, and it has been made clear it is not coming back.

Nothing is achieved by a "voice opposing the current design decisions". What we need are those who support and push forward initiatives to do something about them. That does not mean you have to code an alternative (please, no) - it can (and probably should) be something as simple as using, and voicing their support, for Xfce, Cinnamon or KDE.

codingman
May 13th, 2012, 05:13 PM
Im attacking the mentality of those who personally attack others for their perspectives; since I am doing so in response to ad hominem attacks (not logical attacks of their stated opinions but literally attacks of character) thrown at people who are voicing their opinions of Unity, Cinnamon, etc, I do not believe I am doing what I am speaking against. In other words, I dont attack someone personally for attacking Openbox (even though I love it); THIS is what I have a problem with. Chastising someone for labeling a dissenting voice a "whiner" is what needs to happen, otherwise everyone will be mean to one another which is in direct violation of what Ubuntu stands for (ideologically).


Exactly! Not only pointless, but unrelated to the criticism of (in this case) Unity instead focusing on attacking one's character. Its the mentality of not being open about our experience with Ubuntu that bothers me.
+1 check out my signature

GSF1200S
May 13th, 2012, 08:33 PM
Unity has been around more than 18 months, Gnome-Shell more than 12 months. Those "voicing there [sic] opinions" about Unity and Gnome-Shell after all this time are achieving what, exactly, apart from boring everyone on this forum? Gnome2 is dead, and it has been made clear it is not coming back.

Nothing is achieved by a "voice opposing the current design decisions". What we need are those who support and push forward initiatives to do something about them. That does not mean you have to code an alternative (please, no) - it can (and probably should) be something as simple as using, and voicing their support, for Xfce, Cinnamon or KDE.

I disagree, though in this case I will not attack you since you have not attacked a person but an ideology (of voicing ones opinion). I think it was important that the world at large didnt accept the Nazi way as "here to stay" and instead did something about it; the same could be said for Linux itself becoming an option and response (indirectly) for those not willing to accept Windows or Mac OS as the only way to do something (even if they use these operating systems for purposes other than what they use Linux for).

In my opinion (respectfully), just because the "lords" of desktop environments decide they like a certain approach does not mean I must support that approach or use their product; if it doesnt work, especially when there are MANY people citing legitimate concerns with the experience given (by Unity, Gnome 3, KDE 4, etc), then people should have the right to voice those concerns. By virtue of this, desktop environments may choose to follow the wishes of its users, while others may try to create a new paradigm that fixes the issues not circumventable by current approaches to the desktop experience.

The OP of this thread essentially asks this question: Unity is not as good as Cinnamon (in his opinion, for reasons listed by him or for reasons he believes everyone understands), so why is Canonical pushing Unity instead of something more in tune with the desires of the Ubuntu userbase? You may disagree (about Unity), but this does not mean he shouldnt have the right to speak his mind, especially in a community like Ubuntu's which attempts to value everyone and not practice open elitism (I am not accusing you of this); indeed, if the majority of our userbase agrees that Unity is not as effecient as Gnome 2 or even Gnome 3 (which would be determined with everyone feeling passionate about making their opinion known, voicing their mind, etc), then I believe most people would hope the distrobution would take an approach in line with what people want.

Again, I understand it isnt a democracy here- im just saying that stifling communication for the sake of being agreeable is not conducive to progressing the Ubuntu experience on the basis of users' needs.

Its labeled 'whining' by those who either like Unity or by those who have this mentality of followership in regards to desktop design; ironically, the same fortitude required to introduce a new paradigm like Unity or Gnome 3 is also necessary for those who speak out against those very same "lords"- this should be CELEBRATED, not condemned.

**EDIT** I agree with your last paragraph. I think were dealing with a limitation of language (and how it is conceptual by nature) here as well- while the first paragraph of your response indicates you are against any voice against what the "lords of design" say (just go with it- accept it instead of questioning whether its an improvement or regression), the second one contradicts that (vote with your feet). I guess I disagree with your first paragraph and agree strongly with the second (and think actually writing/posting about opinion is important as well); one should NOT just accept a negative change, but challenge it- including voting by abandonment if the "lords" dont listen.

kevinmchapman
May 13th, 2012, 10:10 PM
Oh dear, oh dear! Let's really not deal with the Nazi reference.... I would suggest you think carefully about that.

Let me ask once again, what are you trying to achieve by "voicing ones opinion"? This is critical to the discussion.

"if the majority of our userbase agrees that Unity is not as effecient as Gnome 2 or even Gnome 3". State your source for believing that you are in the majority. You may wish to search out some of my previous posts on the subject.

I support "constructive criticism", ie. my second paragraph. Bluntly, suggest something positive, don't criticise a fait accomplait.

VTPoet
May 13th, 2012, 10:12 PM
Unity has been around more than 18 months, Gnome-Shell more than 12 months. Those "voicing there [sic] opinions" about Unity and Gnome-Shell after all this time are achieving what, exactly...

This is a discussion forum. I suspect those people just want to 'discuss' what they don't like about Unity. In truth, the people who should probably leave the forum are the ones sick of discussing it, right? I mean, if they're sick of discussing these things, then why are they on a discussion forum? Personally, I don't mind it. People diss my fav DE all the time. I just take it in stride. I enjoy it actually.

kevinmchapman
May 13th, 2012, 10:16 PM
This is a discussion forum. I suspect those people just want to 'discuss' what they don't like about Unity. In truth, the people who should probably leave the forum are the ones sick of discussing it, right? I mean, if they're sick of discussing these things, then why are they on a discussion forum? Personally, I don't mind it. People diss my fav DE all the time. I just take it in stride. I enjoy it actually.

So do I :)

Still, for a third time. What do you expect to achieve?

VTPoet
May 13th, 2012, 10:19 PM
So do I :)

Still, for a third time. What do you expect to achieve?

An enjoyable discussion. I enjoy the perspective of others. I enjoy discussion.

kevinmchapman
May 13th, 2012, 10:27 PM
An enjoyable discussion. I enjoy the perspective of others. I enjoy discussion.

I've read your posts and I believe you, but I'm not convinced you speak for others. They seem to be genuinely upset at the changes and are hankering after a lost past. I would really like to see some other answers.

VTPoet
May 14th, 2012, 01:12 AM
I've read your posts and I believe you, but I'm not convinced you speak for others. They seem to be genuinely upset at the changes and are hankering after a lost past. I would really like to see some other answers.

Probably, in the back of their minds, is the notion that if they can just convince enough people, can just be forceful enough in their persuasion, then they can effect the changes they want to see. In truth, I think I've read that Shuttleworth hardly knows about this forum's existence. He didn't know anything about the "Ubuntu +1" threads that involved beta testing. At the time, I remember being dumbfounded. The thread is an excellent barometer of problems, usage and reaction. But so be it...

Users should probably know that they're wasting their time if they think they're communicating to the powers-that-be on the Ubuntu Forum. From what I've read, neither Shuttleworth nor the devs pay much, if any, attention to this forum. :popcorn:

uRock
May 14th, 2012, 01:18 AM
Nope, I prefer Unity. Looks great, runs great and it is easy to use.

GSF1200S
May 14th, 2012, 03:36 AM
Oh dear, oh dear! Let's really not deal with the Nazi reference.... I would suggest you think carefully about that.

Let me ask once again, what are you trying to achieve by "voicing ones opinion"? This is critical to the discussion.

"if the majority of our userbase agrees that Unity is not as effecient as Gnome 2 or even Gnome 3". State your source for believing that you are in the majority. You may wish to search out some of my previous posts on the subject.

I support "constructive criticism", ie. my second paragraph. Bluntly, suggest something positive, don't criticise a fait accomplait.

How about you quote my words in their entirety rather than quoting out of context?
You may disagree (about Unity), but this does not mean he shouldnt have the right to speak his mind, especially in a community like Ubuntu's which attempts to value everyone and not practice open elitism (I am not accusing you of this); indeed, if the majority of our userbase agrees that Unity is not as effecient as Gnome 2 or even Gnome 3 (which would be determined with everyone feeling passionate about making their opinion known, voicing their mind, etc), then I believe most people would hope the distrobution would take an approach in line with what people want.

I said IF, and then I qualified that by stating "IF" would be determined by the MAJORITY of the community having an issue with a given desktop environment or design decision.

The Nazi reference is not off limits; it is analogous in that what is presented as good (as im sure the Nazis did within their own society) most certainly was not; people have a right to state their dissent with design decisions as I stated before.


Let me ask once again, what are you trying to achieve by "voicing ones opinion"? This is critical to the discussion.

The community should be trying to achieve the knowledge of whether or not design decisions made by those who create the distrobution actually serve the community or not, and if not, do something about it (namely influence future design decisions). If one is simply labeled a "whiner" because they cite negative things about the experience, then social pressure will greatly discourage others from the sort of transparency necessary to answer the question of whether or not such design decisions are actually a positive direction. If noone (or relatively few compared to those who actually represent the dissatisfied group) dissents, how are we to know?

Im all for constructive criticism, but even that has been stifled in many ways. You will see bug reports where developers simply tell others "well were not doing it that way" for simple things like coding in a checkbox for some option that would appease many. Im NOT just talking Unity here- im talking Gnome 3, XFCE, KDE 4, etc..

For a final time, I get it isnt a democracy, but ultimately a given social sphere tends to tow a line BETWEEN the innovators and the realm of former familiarity; occasionally innovation will completely take the world by storm, but often times it will be smaller and more subtle steps. THIS is what we need to determine- where is that line, and where is the design that will blow everything else away? If a person thinks Unity is NOT that design, then people should not personally attack him by calling him a "whiner" because he has that opinion.

GSF1200S
May 14th, 2012, 03:51 AM
Probably, in the back of their minds, is the notion that if they can just convince enough people, can just be forceful enough in their persuasion, then they can effect the changes they want to see. In truth, I think I've read that Shuttleworth hardly knows about this forum's existence. He didn't know anything about the "Ubuntu +1" threads that involved beta testing. At the time, I remember being dumbfounded. The thread is an excellent barometer of problems, usage and reaction. But so be it...

Users should probably know that they're wasting their time if they think they're communicating to the powers-that-be on the Ubuntu Forum. From what I've read, neither Shuttleworth nor the devs pay much, if any, attention to this forum. :popcorn:

Yeah, I pretty much +1 this unfortunately. I see this as an issue really stemming from a capitalist global model of commerce; the social stratification of decision-making and of goods. While capitalism is certainly the best system available at this time, it has the unfortunate consequence of creating a system where the "peons" barely have a voice. It is about profit, about it being "my" way and "my" vision...

I dont mean to turn this into economics or politics :) I figure that every "revolution" (figuratively, not literally) has its day, and by opening up the channels of communication, maybe if it happens, we as a community can accomplish something. Wishful thinking perhaps, but its happened before...

kevinmchapman
May 14th, 2012, 06:29 AM
Probably, in the back of their minds, is the notion that if they can just convince enough people, can just be forceful enough in their persuasion, then they can effect the changes they want to see. In truth, I think I've read that Shuttleworth hardly knows about this forum's existence. He didn't know anything about the "Ubuntu +1" threads that involved beta testing. At the time, I remember being dumbfounded. The thread is an excellent barometer of problems, usage and reaction. But so be it...

Users should probably know that they're wasting their time if they think they're communicating to the powers-that-be on the Ubuntu Forum. From what I've read, neither Shuttleworth nor the devs pay much, if any, attention to this forum. :popcorn:

Thanks for being the first to publicly state this. This is what I was getting at.

ex_isp
May 14th, 2012, 06:33 AM
Right... (Laughing Out Loud!)
You're a funny guy Morbius1... sorry can't help myself.


BIG ditto. Seriously Morbius1!?

Docaltmed
May 14th, 2012, 12:22 PM
It is my belief that Ubuntu would have a very good chance of rivalling Windows if Cinnamon became the standard desktop, anyone else agree ?

Hahahahaha! That's a good one!

I tried Cinnamon, it was mildly groovy but kind of last-year. If retro is your thing, go for it!

VTPoet
May 14th, 2012, 12:54 PM
I tried Cinnamon, it was mildly groovy but kind of last-year. If retro is your thing, go for it!

What about usability, efficiency and configurability? Every Windows user for whom I've installed an Ubuntu variant has preferred XFCE or Cinnamon to Unity. They couldn't give a rat's behind as to whether it was "retro". The one biggest feature they missed was the "window button" app in the panel. They liked seeing what apps were open and being able to press and switch. The launcher didn't cut it. They didn't like it. I didn't as them why. Just saying...

zombifier25
May 14th, 2012, 01:23 PM
I believe Unity has matured a lot in 12.04, but not there yet. Let's hope it will be very configurable when it does.

ikt
May 14th, 2012, 02:54 PM
In truth, I think I've read that Shuttleworth hardly knows about this forum's existence. He didn't know anything about the "Ubuntu +1" threads that involved beta testing. At the time, I remember being dumbfounded. The thread is an excellent barometer of problems, usage and reaction. But so be it...

I'd argue that these forums are not a good barometer for "problems, usage and reaction".

Don't think I'm painting the whole forum as worthless, because it isn't, it's a fantastic forum and I love posting here, but when it comes to "problems, usage and reaction" these forums are undoubtedly a puddle of over-reactive tears and barely representative of the view of the people who post the most here (the tech crowd).

I find real world reactions and what people post in forums to frequently be different even if it comes from the same crowd of people.


I tried Cinnamon, it was mildly groovy but kind of last-year. If retro is your thing, go for it!

I found it exactly the same, and I agree with the sentiment, if you like it go for it! I think a lot of people don't see that if something is incredibly popular in the open source (desktop) world it usually ends up in Ubuntu because all it takes to get software into Ubuntu is a team of volunteers doing the hard yards to get it into Ubuntu in the first place.

Morbius1
May 14th, 2012, 03:18 PM
Originally Posted by VTPoet http://ubuntuforums.org/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=11933312#post11933312)
In truth, I think I've read that Shuttleworth hardly knows about this forum's existence. He didn't know anything about the "Ubuntu +1" threads that involved beta testing. At the time, I remember being dumbfounded. The thread is an excellent barometer of problems, usage and reaction. But so be it..
That's true of the entire development staff apparently.

Re: Unity is the worst desktop I have ever seen

Quote:
Originally Posted by nothingspecial http://ubuntuforums.org/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?p=11503626#post11503626)
Let me try that again.........
But there is absolutely no point moaning about Unity on these forums. Nobody who makes decisions, codes it or has anything to do with it's design is listening.
Just out of curiosity how exactly does Ubuntu get feedback on it's design decisions? Professional reviews, usability labs, ... ?
If you want to improve the usability of Ubuntu, you can try out one of the Ubuntu usability tests on your friends, and record their reactions and impressions of Ubuntu. You can then report these impressions to the Ubuntu Desktop team.

Contact:

Read the UsabilityTesting wiki (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UsabilityTesting) page

Join the ubuntu-desktop mailing list (https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-desktop)So all these Unity's great, Unity sucks, and if only Unity would do X is just between us.

vahnx
May 14th, 2012, 09:24 PM
With Unity they are targeting 3rd world countries or grandmas who have never had a computer before. It's less about power users and more about the 'others', which is fine by me. Sad to see Ubuntu go in this direction as it's the first linux OS I've ever gotten into but the great thing about Linux is there are several variations out there, one of them being Mint which is Ubuntu based.

VTPoet
May 14th, 2012, 10:34 PM
So all these Unity's great, Unity sucks, and if only Unity would do X is just between us.

Yup. I think you've pretty much summed it up. All sound and fury signifying nothing.

codingman
May 14th, 2012, 11:31 PM
the basic point of Ubuntu from the start was to bring linux to the public, and it is doing this well. Unity was a project that was focused on nursing that goal. Power users and all don't like it, switch the DE and look at my sig, of course, unity still is in its progress, like the start of gnome-shell; was it perfect then? Is it better now? Yes, and the same will happen with unity. I say cinnamon is a fine replacement for gnome 2, but not for unity. The basic purpose of unity is to have big icons for the newbies and just switched people. So let's all not complain and realize this is just a discussion and an opinion, not a life dangling fact.

Skara Brae
May 21st, 2012, 12:15 AM
While this is obvious sarcasm, OS X isn't a terrible OS for getting work done, if you ignore some of the ridiculous add-ons and focus on the OS itself.
To a regular user, OS X has things that Linux and Windows do not have, like, say, installing a program. Installing a program won't ever get any easier than in OS X, I dare to bet.

OS X also lacks things, like a start menu (although there are "tricks" for this). I admit that I'm running a little behind: my "1st Gen" iMac can only run OS X 10.4.

The best thing that Apple ever made, is OS X, in my opinion.

Carpentr
May 21st, 2012, 04:48 AM
My opinion of Cinnamon is "Why?" GNOME-Shell is super extensible and can easily be made to look like Cinnamon without forking. Forking is sometimes a good thing, but I don't think it is in this case. The Cinnamon team should (imo) create a set of GNOME-Shell extensions instead of forking. Of course Cinnamon is fairly new (did it come out in December of 2011?), so it may bring something to the table as it matures, but so far it seems to be trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist.

You might find this video interesting:
http://www.jupiterbroadcasting.com/19307/cinnamon-desktop-review-las-s21e08/

lancest
May 21st, 2012, 07:17 AM
What about usability, efficiency and configurability? Every Windows user for whom I've installed an Ubuntu variant has preferred XFCE or Cinnamon to Unity. They couldn't give a rat's behind as to whether it was "retro". The one biggest feature they missed was the "window button" app in the panel. They liked seeing what apps were open and being able to press and switch. The launcher didn't cut it. They didn't like it. I didn't as them why. Just saying...

Yea, that's exactly why I recently put a low pc skill user on Xubuntu.
He couldn't handle the Unity bling,and I'm convinced he'd struggle with Win 7 too.

nigeldodd
May 22nd, 2012, 03:08 PM
I have forced myself to live with Unity for 6 months. I tried to like the confusion between workspaces and desktops, the lack of right click features to configure the desktop, the requirement to know the name of an app before you can launch it (my mind lacks proper noun capabilities and prefers to be offered a choice of "graphics" apps) etc..

I have now increased my life expectancy by installing Cinnamon. Much less frustration, much greater productivity.

One big reason I prefer it to Gnome 3 is the full use of the screen height for apps. Perhaps it is possible to configure Gnome to hide the top bar but it is not something I have found easily.

Please, Ubuntu, make the choice of desktop better integrated into the system.

MadmanRB
May 23rd, 2012, 02:09 AM
I personally say that overall yes I think cinnemon is better then unity as you can actually customize the thing wheree in unity everything is locked down out of your control.
But it needs a few improvements before I use it, otherwise KDE for me

BigSilly
May 25th, 2012, 07:55 PM
My opinion of Cinnamon is "Why?" GNOME-Shell is super extensible and can easily be made to look like Cinnamon without forking. Forking is sometimes a good thing, but I don't think it is in this case. The Cinnamon team should (imo) create a set of GNOME-Shell extensions instead of forking. Of course Cinnamon is fairly new (did it come out in December of 2011?), so it may bring something to the table as it matures, but so far it seems to be trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist.


You might find this video interesting:
http://www.jupiterbroadcasting.com/19307/cinnamon-desktop-review-las-s21e08/

I have to say I was very much of the same opinion, until I actually tried it. I decided to download the latest Mint 13 Cinnamon 64 bit yesterday, and my opinion has completely changed. Though I'm a massive Shell fan and I like Unity, Cinnamon offers something familar yet fresh. What's particularly impressive is resource usage. It hardly demands anything, and is way more thrifty than either Unity or Shell, but still offers some brilliant effects and useability options.

I've watched the video (I love LAS) and while a week ago I completely agreed with Bryan, right now after actually using it, no he's wrong. Still a great show though.

zombifier25
May 27th, 2012, 09:23 AM
Well, I have always considered myself to be a very weird and ignorant dude. I don't use GNOME Shell (love it though) / Cinnamon because of one really really stupid reason: Compiz. I don't care if Shell or Cinnamon is better than Unity at whatever, if Shell lets go of its tight grip at Mutter and allow me to use whatever WMs I want, then I'm a convert.

BigSilly
May 27th, 2012, 09:40 AM
Well for me, with both Cinnamon and Shell, the appeal is they don't use Compiz! Personally I'd like to see Ubuntu move away from it, but that's just my personal.

Copper Bezel
May 28th, 2012, 06:36 AM
Why? Mutter and Compiz seem quite similar in terms of capabilities, performance, and stability. Compiz has more knobs you can twiddle, where Mutter has, well, Shell. What's the advantage of Mutter for Unity? I mean, Cinnamon forked Mutter, from what I've seen, to add window close effects. Doubtless Canonical would have to do the same for Unity, so what's the advantage of maintaining a fork of Mutter over maintaining Compiz?

BigSilly
May 28th, 2012, 07:22 PM
I'm no expert on these matters, just a regular user, but I have always had stability issues with Compiz, and I'm pretty confident it's not the Nvidia drivers as Kwin and Mutter are always problem free, as is Cinnamon right now. Plus, it seems to me that having Unity as a Compiz plugin is a bit of overkill. I mean, Compiz is capable of a whole raft of amazing effects for any distro/situation, but none of these are useful for Ubuntu. You can't just install CCSM and re-enable your favourite effects as the whole thing will often bork. Why does Ubuntu need such a weighty application to essentially perform a few window effects? Wouldn't the alternatives provide a cleaner and lighter way to do it than Compiz? Wasn't that why these things were made in the first place?

Like I say, I'm not an expert and these are only my observations as a non-programmer. Correct me (or flame away) if I'm wrong about anything.

Copper Bezel
May 28th, 2012, 08:14 PM
I think you're mostly right in principle. It's true that the first version of Unity (at least, the first version called Unity, in 10.10) was based on Mutter, and although I know that performance was a serious concern at the time, Mutter has become quite a bit faster since then.

I haven't really had Compiz instabilities that didn't come from a particular plugin, and I haven't had a perfect and unblemished experience with Mutter on my perfectly compatible integrated Intel video card. The "size" of Compiz is also totally dependent on how many plugins are actively running, and the size on disk is dependent on how many are installed, so since Canonical has almost unilateral control over Compiz now, I think the fact that it's still so "big" is a choice by Canonical to appease Compiz fans. So I think the choice of the core compositor is probably not very important, and it could well be that Canonical is sticking with Compiz because Mutter wasn't ready when they needed it, with the slight perk that they at least have total control of their WM this way and don't have to worry about Mutter changing in the future in a way that impacts Unity.

BigSilly
May 28th, 2012, 08:33 PM
Which is a fair point in itself of course. That's why the Mint team had to create Cinnamon too. I think I remember reading a blog post by Clem saying that Gnome 3 was very locked down in this way, which was why they chose to liberate it. I suppose that's exactly how Canonical felt too.