• hunte@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think there is a disconnect in what you call a feature and what is a design decision. GNOME consciously deviated from the “desktop” paradigm. I’m not saying that’s a good thing or everyone has to like it but this is what they did. I’m not trying to nitpick here but I think it’s important to see what is actually happening here, desktop icons are not being worked on not because they hate the users and are lazy in implementing things but because there is no traditional desktop. The overall GNOME UI is not made along this line of implementation, instead it has the activities view. Again, I’m not saying you have to like this and maybe it’s a dumb way to make a UI, idk, but criticizing it for not having desktop icons is like criticizing MacOS for not having a start menu. It’s just not made that way.

    I think quite a big problem with KDE that they are also trying to break away from is making the UI resemble too much of Windows. New users then will expect things to behave exactly like Windows when it just can’t. That doesn’t mean that there are missing features necesserally but that things are implemented differently and the uninitiated user should know that from a first glance.

    Overall I get the sentiment. GNOME is different and needs getting used to and does not fit all workflows out of the box. It has missing features that I wish would be implemented but overall I like the direction they took. It’s new, different and after a couple of weeks of adjusting I really gotten to like it. I don’t really miss desktop icons because I haven’t used them in Windows anyway, I personally like to launch my programs from the start menu/app launcher.