I think its because a lot of this stuff is faster to do through command line. And people developing GUI tools are ones that are already good at CLI so they might not understand why a graphical tool might be needed and then ones that do, start learning CLI to program a tool and on the way might realize it’s just easier to console. Kinda where I’m at. Plus if there are many of the same tool it might vary in GUI and when giving someone instructions it’s easier to just say the command to type than to cover every possible variation of GUI environment. That’s my take on this.
I’ve always felt that Arch has the least amount of personal compromises. For “bleeding edge,” it’s also generally stable and has a wealth of community support and documentation.
I use them on both. I use more of them (6) on my desktop, and I use them more often, but only because I’m usually doing several tasks on my desktop while my laptop is for more casual use and I only require two or three. I mostly use Gnome and bind Alt+Num for each workspace.
I personally love gnome. But I would not want to use it without my extensions even for a few hours. Yes upgrading they sometimes break with updates but most of the time the developers update for the new version in less than a week. Othr than that I just love the polished look and feel. Everything looks kneatly organized and clean. Ofcourse I have gripes here and there. For example the Software Center sucks even with its sleek look. It fails to get app information or check for updates too often and needs a restart. But I tried KDE too and it just doesn’t feel as nice to use. And if you feel Gnome isn’t for you than that’s great too since with Linux you have so many options. But I will stick with Gnome for the time being.
I like Pika Backup. It’s a frontend for borgbackup that also let’s you mount and browse your archive with a few clicks. I think it’s pretty handy on a desktop PC. And since it uses borgbackup you also get encryption with it.
Always, because you get to assign keyboard shortcuts to each one (and then use each one for a dedicated purpose). Much faster workflow than alt-tabbing your way through an arbitary list of programs.
I think GNOME being minimalist with extensions is a good thing, but I disagree with what GNOME considers basic functionality or not. Two things that stick out:
an app launcher. Literally every other desktop on the planet has one, how this isn't considered basic functionality is beyond me. Give your grandparents a vanilla GNOME computer and tell them to get to Facebook and you will see how necessary this is in real time. Default should be dash-to-dock with intelligent autohide so you only see it when you need it. This would fulfill GNOME's hangups about it while also improving usability, so I fail to see a downside.
tray icons. GNOME treats background processes like bugs to be squashed. Let's just get real here for a second: sometimes you want programs to run in the background and sometimes you want to be able to see what they are doing in real time. I want my email clients to tell me when I get emails, I wan't my Nextcloud to tell me when there are sync issues, and I want Discord to tell me if I get DMs. This should be considered basic functionality.
an app launcher. Literally every other desktop on the planet has one, how this isn’t considered basic functionality is beyond me. Give your grandparents a vanilla GNOME computer and tell them to get to Facebook and you will see how necessary this is. Default should be dash-to-dock with intelligent autohide so you only see it when you need it. This would fulfill GNOME’s hangups about it while also improving usability, so I fail to see a downside.
GNOME does have a launcher, which works just like the launcher on Mac and Android. You can even select whether to see all your apps or only the most-used ones. I do agree that a taskbar/dock with intelligent auto-hide is a must, though (at least for my usability). That’s also not to say that some folks would rather have a Windows style launcher, and there are several DEs that provide that.
It's not really the same design philosophy as iOS and Android since those actually have the equivalent of desktop icons, which function like a taskbar app launcher. So even they have a way of launching apps without a secondary menu.
an app launcher. Literally every other desktop on the planet has one, how this isn’t considered basic functionality is beyond me. Give your grandparents a vanilla GNOME computer and tell them to get to Facebook and you will see how necessary this is. Default should be dash-to-dock with intelligent autohide so you only see it when you need it. This would fulfill GNOME’s hangups about it while also improving usability, so I fail to see a downside.
Gnome has one. You tap the super key for the dock, then again for the full app list. I see thiscoomplaint all the time, and it confuses me every time.
“I don’t like the default app launcher” or “I’d prefer an always visible dock” fine, but Gnome doesn’t have one? What?
tray icons. GNOME treats background processes like bugs to be squashed. Let’s just get real here for a second: sometimes you want programs to run in the background and sometimes you want to be able to see what they are doing in real time. I want my email clients to tell me when I get emails, I wan’t my Nextcloud to tell me when there are sync issues, and I want Discord to tell me if I get DMs. This should be considered basic functionality.
I both agree and disagree with this. Gnome is trying to make a unified system for this sort of thing, and that’s admirable, but until it works, we kinda need a notification tray.
linux
Newest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.