No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
I am not against this at all. I am probably stating the obvious, but Gnome-shell would still need to be just a ''yum install'' away and should not become a second-class UI like KDE used to be in Fedora. Personally I quite like Gnome shell, but I know far more people who don't. I also have an issue with its weight, but Cinnamon does not solve that either. | I am not against this at all. I am probably stating the obvious, but Gnome-shell would still need to be just a ''yum install'' away and should not become a second-class UI like KDE used to be in Fedora. Personally I quite like Gnome shell, but I know far more people who don't. I also have an issue with its weight, but Cinnamon does not solve that either. | ||
Cinnamon may have started out as 'using the GNOME 3 stack', but at this stage, they have full-scale forks of GNOME shell, mutter and nautilus.--[[User:Mclasen|Mclasen]] ([[User talk:Mclasen|talk]]) 13:06, 25 January 2013 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 13:06, 25 January 2013
David Dreggors:
I disagree, I think the Gnome 3 shell is a fantastic UI. The workflow is fast and quite intuitive as well. Besides, that is what spins are for. If you like cinnamon grab (or make) a cinnamon spin.
Further, I would submit that once you start actually learning and using the keyboard shortcuts in Gnome 3 you will also enjoy it. Just because it is different than what you are used to does not make it evil or bad.
Chris Cowley:
I am not against this at all. I am probably stating the obvious, but Gnome-shell would still need to be just a yum install away and should not become a second-class UI like KDE used to be in Fedora. Personally I quite like Gnome shell, but I know far more people who don't. I also have an issue with its weight, but Cinnamon does not solve that either.
Cinnamon may have started out as 'using the GNOME 3 stack', but at this stage, they have full-scale forks of GNOME shell, mutter and nautilus.--Mclasen (talk) 13:06, 25 January 2013 (UTC)