I HATED GNOME when I first tried it. They keep trying to reinvent the condom for absolutely no reasons other then "we know what you actually want" and that to me, goes against what Linux is as a whole. Fuck gnome
this post was submitted on 19 Jan 2026
157 points (95.9% liked)
Linux
61501 readers
546 users here now
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
I've avoided Gnome since the shift to GTK 3, when it became apparent that the devs were hiding functionality in the name of some greater vision that was never explained to lesser mortals.
You don't get to treat me as a moron, only my wife can do that.
XFCE and KDE have served me well, at least they don't hide settings and functionality from me.
I agree. GNOME 3 is completely unusable, and I can't stand client side decorations because it leads to inconsistencies and ugly apps. Give me a standard title bar FFS
I wouldn't say unusable, it's tolerable. But it does get in your face in a very opinionated way, that gets old fast.
I'm a bit out of the loop,... but every time I hear about the gnome project it sounds a bit authoritarian and close minded. Maybe it's because they're spread thin ? but it seems more like they have tunnel vision. They remind me of Apple
They wish they were Apple, lol.
Apple actually makes good design decisions that their users like.
Everyone tries to copy Apple. Nobody tries to copy gnome.
Good software should be handled like that, try looking at how the kernel does things.
Sadly for gnome doing so does not make you automathically good software
Should a desktop environment use the same philosophy as a kernel ? don't they have different requirements ? I'm asking as a layman
The less options, the better for a new person to jump in. Modern Gnome is a DE I can recommend everyone. ‘It’s like Mac but simpler,’ I advertise it. I like it even as a pro user, though. But even if we, the pro users, couldn’t work with it, that’s okay. Many pro users hate modern Gnome, and use other environments. But having one with limited options and an opinionated design hurts nobody, and helps a lot. I can install it for an elderly parent or a friend, and they can use it without much assistance, as it’s not very far from their tablet or smartphone.
I'd say KDE Plasma 6 with one of the one-button global theme modifications can do everything you're promising, while resulting in a simpler and more familiar layout.
More options help everyone, whether they use them or not.
load more comments
(4 replies)
If they would just take it a step further and embraced the Kernel's most important "don't break userspace" rule.
I love Gnome, for me... their UI is the most beautiful of any desktop OS. But I had to move to KDE Plasma primarily for all the gaming related features that come out first on Plasma. That led me to see just how much flexibility I was missing.
Now I greatly value both desktop environments, both visions are valid, but they cater completely different minded users.
Beautiful, I agree. It looks slick, but that's not what I am looking for in a tool
Yes, tunnel-vision.
And if you report a non-critical bug, it gets shoved around between projects that deny responsibility, until it gets dropped as "not our problem, ask there".
Not true at all. Reported a very non-critical Bug with dynamic workspaces and it got fixed within 12 hours.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Gnome is the apple of the Linux world. It's their way or the high way, and you have to smack a butt load of mods to make it remotely modifiable.
yes, I've had to install extensions to add basic things, and some said they were compatible but in fact weren't.... it was complicated
Yeah, I can't stand GNOME. It's completely unusable.
KDE is great and also the Linux Mint DE, Cinnamon.
Since Valve's midas touch, KDE Plasma has been pure gold for gaming. I love it.
It's funny how many GNOME people whine about the title bar wasting so much space when GNOME apps literally look like as if they've been made for touchscreen users. Also, what about the great black bar on the top of the system?
We should honestly just leave GNOME behind and have them deal with it. We won't move forward much with their child-like stubbornness and toxic community.
GNOME looks like if Fisher-Price made a My First Linux Desktop baby toy, it just bothers me for some reason.
That's because they're engineering their desktop for first time users who look first, then click. Having things visually "tidy" without too much "clutter" or anything that might make them feel overwhelmed is what they're looking for. Being predictable, consistent, or able to learn by muscle memory is less important. If you're measuring success based primarily on increasing number of users, onboarding is by far the most important aspect of design.
Seasoned users of a piece of software know exactly where the button/menu/tool they want is, and their needs are often directly contrary to a first time user's needs. These users want the element they're looking for to be accessible in as few actions and little thought as possible.
The ideal software that you would use day to day is able to be approachable, but holds your hand while you become a seasoned user. Menubars were ideal for this. Every function is laid out for new users to look through. You have spacial memory for where each function is organized. On MacOS and a couple linux desktop environments functions with a keyboard command associated would have that command displayed beside them (and you can even set one if one doesn't exist, or change one that does), gently assisting you to use the program more easily. Several desktops also offer searchable menubars which is just another layer of convenience. Big shiny buttons for common functions and a hamburger menu are simply a step backward from the traditional menu bar. You're only a new user of a piece of software once.
At best, GNOME, the party in control of GTK and design for a huge swath of software, refuse to play ball and cooperate with the rest of the linux/FLOSS desktop ecosystem. At worst they want to throw out all the literature about muscle memory, predictability, and familiarity in UI design and impose their frankly annoying Fisher-Price design on everyone else while calling you an out of touch elitist for resisting this.
I'm using it since it came and actually got used to it directly, the search engine was efficient enough so I could skip the use of a mouse to open the few GUI I need
I could probably use something lighter but doesn't feel the need of, I have already so many unfinished projects that spending time on setting up something when this works without change seems useless.
Oh absolutely no judgement on the people that use it, it’s just that’s the design language it reminds me of. I typically use KDE on bare metal Linux installs and xfce on my VMs, but like 99% of my Linux usage is in a full screen terminal running tmux so at the end of the day the desktop environment I’m running doesn’t matter at all.
And yeah I completely get the aversion to changing a set up that works.
load more comments
(7 replies)
I just hate how the CSDs keep moving the title buttons around depending on how wide the header bar is. I want my buttons in the exact same place and order no matter what. If I have to think about how to minimize/maximize/close a window for a tenth of a second it's too long.
They also regularly take away very useful menubars and that's even worse in my opinion.
load more comments
(1 replies)
The whole notion of CSDs is a blueprint example of what happens when UI designers try to think things through too hard. They come up with grand solutions to trivial problems that are so poorly thought through that they create even bigger problems.
Realistically, nobody is going rewrite their entire application just because of what a tiny cabal of Gnome developers think. Just read this post that was linked elsewhere in this thread. At the end, Tobias is basically arguing that people should go out there and harass the developers of all Linux desktop applications (including the entire KDE project!) to follow through on this ridiculous idea:
Thus, our goal is for as many apps as possible to have the following properites [sic]
- No title bar
- Native-looking close/maximize/minimize icons
- Respects the setting for showing/hiding minimize and maximize
- Respects the setting for buttons to be on the left/right side of the window
Which apps are affected? Basically, all applications not using GTK3 (and a few that do use GTK3). That includes GTK2, Qt, and Electron apps.
If that alone doesn't alert people of how out-of-touch the Gnome developers are, then I don't know what would.
They justify the rejection of SSD because it isn't part of the core Wayland protocol and at the same time push client apps for the "minimize" and "maximize" buttons (along with respecting some settings) despite it also not being part of the core protocol and it being only possible through extensions. There's a ton of tiling compositors that don't even have any concept of minimize/maximize, so why should this be required of every client app?
It feels backwards to ask the app developers to be the ones adding the UI for whatever features the window compositor might decide to have. They might as well be asking all app developers to add a "fullscreen" button to the decoration, or a "sticky" button, or a "roll up"/"shade" button like many old school X11 WM used to have. This would lead to apps lagging behind in terms of what they have implemented support for and resulting in inconsistent UX, and at the same time limiting the flexibility and user customization of the decorations, not just in terms of visuals but also function and behavior.
This is the main argument the GNOME developers use to justify why they don’t support SSD. This is true, xdg-decoration is an “unstable” protocol, and wayland was originally designed with only CSD in mind.
This is the main argument they use but this is not the main reason. The main reason is "design". SSDs are not a part of GNOME HIG or GNOME's vision. It's not that they just 'don't like it'. They actively want to kill it, at least in their own ecosystem.
The original 2018 "CSD initiative" blog post has TLDR on top saying, " Let’s get rid of title bars. Join the revolution!" so they consider this a "revolution".
I 100% agree, but I didn't want to come across too accusatory in my article so I chose to indirectly adress it in this paragraph:
The real problem is the idea that GNOME project shouldn’t cater to [people who want SSD]. It would be like GNOME not supporting xdg-file-chooser and saying that each app should ship their own file picker. But GNOME does support it, and only apps that wish to implement their own file picker do so.
Since both approaches are used, and liked, miscellaneous advantages and disadvantages of either approach are irrelevant, and so are other arguments pertaining to design. This is why I haven’t brought them up.
basically saying I think their vision doesn't matter when it comes to supporting things like that for third party apps.
Because they're objectively better on a desktop.
Your compositor should control the window - if the poorly implemented client hangs, you can just click the server-side close button a couple times and get the "shall I force close this?" popup
The only reason for CSD is touch interfaces on small screens. In that case, you still need some other interface to handle misbehaving applications, but they tend to be harder to use, e.g. the removal of home/back buttons on Android
Edit: If you're trying to improve on SSD, you could consider some model where the client can register some actions it would like to have displayed to the compositor, and the compositor can relay clicks back to the client. In this scheme, the compositor still owns the title bar, but the client can request special decorations
load more comments
(1 replies)
Because hamburger menus do not belong on any screen larger than a tablet
Gnome was my first WM. Modern Gnome provides the best macOS-like experience on Linux. I stopped using Gnome years ago because hostility to ANY customization means EVERY Gnome update breaks SOMETHING I want until Gnome Tweaks or whatever works around it 6 months later. It's a really shitty altitude for a Linux WM to have, honestly. I use KDE now.
personally I love the way gnome apps use CSD, but then I only ever use gnome. I'm not a fan of the absolute statements people make here, either saying CSD is terrible or superior, I feel like their actual usage is a personal preference.
that said, I would prefer if the gnome project made much more of an effort to integrate its apps into the wider ecosystem. They could add an option that GTK listens to that turns the title bar into just a menu bar, allowing SSD desktops to provide their own decoration. and the gnome desktop could also provide default decorations for apps that don't have CSD. I think this would provide a better experience for both gnome users and users of other desktops
I'm pretty sure GTK used to do exactly that, and for a while after they stopped supporting it there was a patched version of GTK that brought that functionality back.
I'm mainly salty about this because programs with forced CSDs make my tiling window manager look like shit, and getting away from them is becoming increasingly difficult.
To not be a PITA.
Typos in French version:
tandis que d’autres ne sont pas pensent que ça fait partie de l’application
GNOME mettrait évidement en place les protocoles pertinents et activerait les décorations côté serveur sur toutes les applications qui ne demandent pas explicitement le SSD.
-> CSD
Side note: after reading all this I still read Solid State Drive and wonder why Gnome want me to use Hard Disk Drive…
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›