• Semperverus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    88
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 month ago

    It’s interesting to see that taking a “My way or the highway” approach seems to have actual repercussions. Almost as if nobody wants to work with you when you do that.

    I know that I and many others have donated to KDE due to their vibrance and inclusivity in the conversation. They have panels where they actively ask what it is that users want to see (within the scope of some broader goals they’ve set for the year).

    • dinckel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      39
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      A lot of people have been very upset at the GNOME foundation, and their all-or-nothing decisions. They repelled some of the biggest contributors, to the point where they decided to create their own entire graphical stacks, just to avoid fighting the GTK. I don’t really understand the point behind their decisions

    • BCsven@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 month ago

      Possibly, but the articles says they were operating on surplus funds until it ran out. Sounds like because of surplus funds they weren’t actively looking for new sources of income…until oops pocket is empty

    • Possibly linux@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Gnome has different goals than KDE. The idea behind gnome development is to keep it as simple as possible. I think a lot of people around gnome went way to far but libadwaita is the right direction. GTK4 is very powerful despite what people think.

      Hopefully the leadership will get more involved with average users. The problem with gnome as it stands is that they don’t have a good understanding of what is actually used. I think they should absolutely not follow KDE as KDE is very cluttered. I like the minimal menus and clean design the problem is that the gnome UI design guidelines don’t specify how much settings to retain. It just says remove stuff that may not be used which is a train wreck.

      I wish they would better leverage gnome extensions to do testing. They could have experimental features be extensions that people could try. Combine that with some sort of feedback system and you can rapidly test new things.

      I also think the guidelines should specify what is considered necessary as far as options go. Gnome keeps things streamlined and well tested but I’ve noticed some app developers strip out elements they don’t think are necessary that end up causing major issues.

      Lastly they should work with the Mint team to combine efforts. I think they have similar end goals and it would be beneficial to work to create shared standards that are used across desktops. I think the Mint team is over reacting about GTK4 but that’s just me.

    • Hugin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      Yeah I was a Gnome user until Gnome 3. That was so unusable I switched to xfce and later Mate. There insistence on that big bloated touch screen interface on a primarily desktop UI was so stupid and cost them users.

      Now not enough people care if they stick around to fund them.