Why didn't people like gnome 3? I just switched from a tiling WM and think it's comfy as fuck

Why didn't people like gnome 3? I just switched from a tiling WM and think it's comfy as fuck.

it was too advanced for linux users

I just use what ever I like. To me, Xfce and AwesomeWm are comfy. Gnome 3 is cool, but it isn't my cup of tea. As the great saying goes, to each their own.

It hogs system resources for minimal aesthetic or functional gain.

Don't get me wrong, it's a solid design for laptop users that are new to GNU/Linux or *BSD. The problem is that if you're an advanced user, you see that it is not an efficient or attractive solution compared to the alternatives that allow greater flexibility to control your workflow and manage system resources.

I used to hate it, but I had barely used it. Once I switched to Fedora, and added some extensions, it became comfy as fuck.

>Bloat
>Shit UI
>Resource intensive
>Ugly
>Gnome2 was better and still is
>Looks like OSX
pick any

Because it's designed by retards who assumed tablets would replace desktop PCs. You know what the worst thing about it is? It even fails as a tablet GUI because most elements are too small to be used by fingers

It's pretty good, I've used it for quite a while.
Now I'm using i3, but I still have gnome installed, might be useful when connecting to a projector or whatever.

But I like it. On a small laptop screen the emphasis on full-screen stuff and multiple desktops works very well.

The basic experience --- settings dialogs, sane defaults, etc. --- is pretty polished and works very well compared to shit tier Linux "desktops" where you're back to hand editing some arcane configuration file within 5 minutes of installing because the GUI for it just does not work.

Also, it usually doesn't fuck up its multi-display configuration when the displays are detected in a slightly different order than last time, or when one of them ends up in power saving mode, which is like a fucking legendary achievement in the world of desktop Linux.

This.

because Sup Forums hates everything that basically just wreks. It gives them autism attack because their ricing and tweaking is irrelevant.

People did, the retards on Sup Forums don't.

It's unusable without extensions. You might as well use Plasma if you're going to customize it.

It's simplicity took away all the "complicated" useless stuff (which is great btw). Now the average Linux-pro hacker can't flaunt his tech-peen anymore, therefore they say it sucks.

It's like macOS Aqua but worse. I just use either KDE or MATE now.

You can scale up the whole surface by a mouse-click moron

>connected displays always break for me with gnome
>just werk on i3
What did he mean by this

Using extensions is a vital part of the GUI-experience.

KDE has better functionality, can be made to look like almost anything you want, and has better HiDPI support.

Plus, QT is much better than GTK.

There's no excuse to use Gnome.

...

>no taskbar
>no visible hide button

I would use it, but my fans are always running when I use gnome 3.

what gnome extensions do you guys use?

Does KDE give you an overview of all the windows you have open by pressing the same button you use to open another? Can you at least pin an application to the taskbar and open a file in said app by dropping it onto the icon? What do you mean by functionality?

I think its got some good bits, but the general flow with the dock and window management is horrible.

It is comfy after installing dash to dock.