← Back to context Comment by pjmlp 5 hours ago When compared with GNOME 2.0. Mate and Cinnamon exist for a reason. 2 comments pjmlp Reply gf000 5 hours ago 'you are used to that other thing' is not equivalent to being better. pjmlp 4 hours ago Ok, so here are the points where GNOME 3.0 is worse:- Basic window manager capabilities since twm and fwvm require extensions- JavaScript all over the place, and for several years, GJS + SpiderMonkey had enough leaks and loss of performance versus the C based extensions- Windows like registry for gsettings.- One needs a third party app to actually edit gsettings in a comfortable way- Multiple reboots on the IDE tooling, the new designer actually uses Web rendering tech for what are supposed to be native applications- The way virtual monitors are managed versus traditional X Windows managers is bonkers- No support for Windows shading, again another classical X Windows manager featurePlenty of others I could list.
gf000 5 hours ago 'you are used to that other thing' is not equivalent to being better. pjmlp 4 hours ago Ok, so here are the points where GNOME 3.0 is worse:- Basic window manager capabilities since twm and fwvm require extensions- JavaScript all over the place, and for several years, GJS + SpiderMonkey had enough leaks and loss of performance versus the C based extensions- Windows like registry for gsettings.- One needs a third party app to actually edit gsettings in a comfortable way- Multiple reboots on the IDE tooling, the new designer actually uses Web rendering tech for what are supposed to be native applications- The way virtual monitors are managed versus traditional X Windows managers is bonkers- No support for Windows shading, again another classical X Windows manager featurePlenty of others I could list.
pjmlp 4 hours ago Ok, so here are the points where GNOME 3.0 is worse:- Basic window manager capabilities since twm and fwvm require extensions- JavaScript all over the place, and for several years, GJS + SpiderMonkey had enough leaks and loss of performance versus the C based extensions- Windows like registry for gsettings.- One needs a third party app to actually edit gsettings in a comfortable way- Multiple reboots on the IDE tooling, the new designer actually uses Web rendering tech for what are supposed to be native applications- The way virtual monitors are managed versus traditional X Windows managers is bonkers- No support for Windows shading, again another classical X Windows manager featurePlenty of others I could list.
'you are used to that other thing' is not equivalent to being better.
Ok, so here are the points where GNOME 3.0 is worse:
- Basic window manager capabilities since twm and fwvm require extensions
- JavaScript all over the place, and for several years, GJS + SpiderMonkey had enough leaks and loss of performance versus the C based extensions
- Windows like registry for gsettings.
- One needs a third party app to actually edit gsettings in a comfortable way
- Multiple reboots on the IDE tooling, the new designer actually uses Web rendering tech for what are supposed to be native applications
- The way virtual monitors are managed versus traditional X Windows managers is bonkers
- No support for Windows shading, again another classical X Windows manager feature
Plenty of others I could list.