Discussion in 'all things UNIX' started by vasa1, Feb 1, 2012.
After reading page 3 of the article, I'm surprised by the above summary/sentence.
I'd expect to read something like;
"Second, between the Unity approach to force a touch-screen like DE onto users (for a significant amount to their dismay) and the effort to recreate a highly regarded visual layer on top of new technology, the danger exists that practical innovation will be slowed or lost altogether."
Clement Lefebre has given Gnome users the option to, by and large, keep using their favourite DE while not being forced to abandon (underlying) Gnome 3 developments.
If anything having been developed over the last year seems like practical, it's Cinnamon imo.
I mean, really, what's up with the Unity abomination being 'perfected' with HUD? After much user input/research, Shuttleworth et al have found that's what users want? Partial replacement of the easy menus? And they also want to start talking (likely ferociously in the beginning) to their notebook all day?
I strongly agree though with a part of the article; Unity is a DE solution to almost no one's problem, Cinnamon is a solution to many user's DE problems.
Good article about Linux desktop environments and their futures, thanks. I find Unity fine for most tasks. As for HUD, how does it save space when Ubuntu already places the menu on the taskbar?
Separate names with a comma.