Jayce
Fully Optimized
- Messages
- 3,056
- Location
- /home/jason
After my big splash on KDE 4.10 I decided to test out a few other desktop environments. While this is largely about Gnome Shell, I threw in some comparatives to KDE and Unity as well.
Gnome Shell was one that came on the radar rather quickly since it's one I have admittedly not used too extensively in recent weeks. Each time a new GS update came out it looked more and more attractive to me. As a precursor to this conversation, I tested Gnome Shell when it was in the early early alpha stages. If I spoke to any given Linux user, even in the Gnome IRC chat, they would almost definitely not know what I was talking about at the time. I had quite a few frustrations with Gnome Shell. It was clunky, slow, and while it was an intuitive interface it was riddled with shortcomings. For example, I ran into one scenario where I couldn't even add a printer via IP unless it was discovered by the system through its network scan. Problem is, my printer was not picked up by the network scan. Now what? To localhost:631 I went. This enraged me like no other, as GS aimed to be simple to use while it stripped away enough features to require users to go through a set of loops in order to accomplish a simple task - like add a network printer via IP. Even though the newer Gnome Shell I'm using seems to not allow me to add LPD entries, it picked up both of my network printers with their "search by address" feature. Worked both times.
I fired up Gnome Shell with some sort of kid-in-candy-store type of excitement. I knew how beautiful Gnome Shell was prior, and I know a co-worker of mine uses it on Arch and loves it. I just always had this anti bias against it as Gnome developers have traditionally been a little difficult to deal with. However, one could argue that ANY developer is difficult to deal with, which is a reality I am continually reminded of as I submit more and more bug reports on any desktop environment, from KDE to Unity to etc etc. But hey, give those guys credit, they work hard and it's appreciated.
The first thing I noticed is I liked how Gnome Shell could be PPA'd to newer versions. For example, with Unity on 12.04, I couldn't upgrade it (based on what I was told plus what Google searches were suggesting) because of its vast array of system-level dependencies that vary wildly between 12.04, 12.10, etc. This was disappointing simply because I wanted to experience the newer Unity versions without updating my entire system.
To pick on Unity a little bit (please note, I love Unity), I've always been frustrated by its manual search mechanism for applications. I feel as though interfaces need to have a balance between mouse and keyboard intuitiveness, not favor one or the other. With Unity, you first click the dash icon. Then you click the application dash at the bottom. Then you have to click on "more applications" to see your full list. I don't care to see what applications are available from software center. I also don't care about my recent applications. I don't see the point of recent applications being here when they're already under the first menu prior to clicking the applications lens to begin with. I have tolerated these shortcomings since I have always been a big fan of the super key + type-to-find-application combo. While I will say that Unity in the 13.04 beta is very fast, Gnome Shell's current implementation is absolutely faster than Unity in 12.04. I also like the simplified look of Gnome Shell. It seems to offer a ton of flexibility with the use of extensions while keeping a simple, streamlined interface. I found an array of extensions I swear by. Currently I have my sent/receive network traffic being continuously displayed in the upper bar. I also have a media player extension which allows me to switch tracks without even opening Clementine. Sure, Unity has this, but Gnome Shell's layout just feels cleaner and more streamlined. I'm also a big fan of the "dash to dock" extension, which presents the left bar found in the activities menu to be present all of the time without having to hot corner. There's also a "dock" extension, which is the same thing but looks slightly slightly different and is justified on the right side of the screen. Both of them very usable if you don't like having to hot corner to see your bar of application icons. There's also no denying that Gnome Shell's dash menu is exponentially simpler to use, however I do like how Unity's dash can search for individual files. That came in handy at times, however having to continuously hit "show more" was irritating. I guess the show files thing in Unity is like a +1 with a deducation of .5 all at once.
While I have my frustrations with Gnome Shell (only listing suspend in the menu unless you hold ALT to see restart/shutdown - really guys?), I do like how it's consistent with each version. Each and every time I can see exactly what I need and bam - I know where it's at. With Unity, each version reorganizes things a little bit. I remember going into 13.04 and seeing a different selection of options within the upper-right menu. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but I would prefer to see a select set of options last instead of seeing them get rearranged with each 6 month release.
If I had to boil down my last remaining thoughts surrounding the "big 3" desktop environments, namely Gnome Shell, KDE, and Unity, this would be my overall synopsis.
Unity - Out of the box it's rather easy to use. It's an environment grandma could get used to, but after some degree of tinkering as the dash menu can offer too much information in too little space. I like Unity because from the get-go it doesn't feel as though it needs a solid amount of tinkering to get off the ground. That said, tinkering in general with Unity is a bit of a lost cause right now, but I'm sure Canonical will change that in the future. An add-on tool I found (the name slips my mind) for 13.04 offered a considerable amount of flexibility, however it just manipulates the way Unity looks/feels, whereas Gnome Shell offers extensions that can wildly change or alter the behavior of the entire system. THIS is the type of customizability I think Unity needs to go for. Tools that help change the icons and colors of the Unity bar only go so far.
KDE - Out of the box, KDE is rather boring to me. I will admit I'm not a huge fan of the bottom-justified panel oriented environments. Even on Windows, I found myself moving the bar to the left or top side of the panel. It just felt more natural to me. KDE often feels like a guard dog that will get distracted by a simple tennis ball. That's not to slam KDE, I find KDE to be beautiful and amazing, and quite honestly it's been my main desktop environment lately, but sometimes I wonder why certain things are organized the way they are. That said, I do acknowledge they have a monumental amount of configurable options, easily the highest number of configurable options of any desktop environment I've used, so cataloging features and settings is far from easy. Despite the magnitude of customizability KDE brings to the table, there are certain things that I would like to see them dig deeper with. KDE is something that would be relatively usable by grandma out of the box, but not quite as easy to use as Unity or Gnome Shell, in my opinion. It's something I can see a power user using, or simply a user who's super headstrong about having 100% control with every element of their desktop environment. KDE 4.10 is fast, highly configurable, and undoubtedly kind of customization.
Gnome Shell - I was a one time hater, but now that it's matured a little but I'm really liking what I'm seeing as a whole. I still have minor frustrations with it. For example, why keep shut down and restart out of the menu... why? Maybe I don't want to suspend... ever think of that? Ironically enough I always, always suspend my machines, so it's really not a bother... I guess I'm just being vocal for other users who would prefer to have them visible. Also, I really like the idea of having the dock seen in the activities overlay as being available all of the time without needing to hot corner. Oh, wait! We're talking about Gnome Shell here! These things can be fixed by extensions! Annnnd that brings me to my next point. Gnome Shell offers a vast degree of customizable options via extensions (which by the way are super easy to install from their extensions home page found here - https://extensions.gnome.org/) while providing you with a super simple yet super powerful easy to use desktop. It's fast, flows nicely, offers some degree of eye candy that is pleasing, and the dash menu just makes sense. I don't need to click 6 times to find an application via mouse. I can hot corner, click once on applications, and scroll to what I need. That... makes sense.
In closing, all desktop environments have pros and cons. In the world of open source software, we are spoiled with endless options. Instead of participating in what seems to be never ending squabbles about which one is better, I think it's important to embrace the benefits of all desktop environments. These options do not exist in the Microsoft or Apple world. We are fortunate to have such flexibility. YOU are in control of your system. Nobody else. After all, when you order a lager and your buddy orders a light beer, do you squabble over that, or do you toast together for a good time? Bazinga.
Gnome Shell was one that came on the radar rather quickly since it's one I have admittedly not used too extensively in recent weeks. Each time a new GS update came out it looked more and more attractive to me. As a precursor to this conversation, I tested Gnome Shell when it was in the early early alpha stages. If I spoke to any given Linux user, even in the Gnome IRC chat, they would almost definitely not know what I was talking about at the time. I had quite a few frustrations with Gnome Shell. It was clunky, slow, and while it was an intuitive interface it was riddled with shortcomings. For example, I ran into one scenario where I couldn't even add a printer via IP unless it was discovered by the system through its network scan. Problem is, my printer was not picked up by the network scan. Now what? To localhost:631 I went. This enraged me like no other, as GS aimed to be simple to use while it stripped away enough features to require users to go through a set of loops in order to accomplish a simple task - like add a network printer via IP. Even though the newer Gnome Shell I'm using seems to not allow me to add LPD entries, it picked up both of my network printers with their "search by address" feature. Worked both times.
I fired up Gnome Shell with some sort of kid-in-candy-store type of excitement. I knew how beautiful Gnome Shell was prior, and I know a co-worker of mine uses it on Arch and loves it. I just always had this anti bias against it as Gnome developers have traditionally been a little difficult to deal with. However, one could argue that ANY developer is difficult to deal with, which is a reality I am continually reminded of as I submit more and more bug reports on any desktop environment, from KDE to Unity to etc etc. But hey, give those guys credit, they work hard and it's appreciated.
The first thing I noticed is I liked how Gnome Shell could be PPA'd to newer versions. For example, with Unity on 12.04, I couldn't upgrade it (based on what I was told plus what Google searches were suggesting) because of its vast array of system-level dependencies that vary wildly between 12.04, 12.10, etc. This was disappointing simply because I wanted to experience the newer Unity versions without updating my entire system.
To pick on Unity a little bit (please note, I love Unity), I've always been frustrated by its manual search mechanism for applications. I feel as though interfaces need to have a balance between mouse and keyboard intuitiveness, not favor one or the other. With Unity, you first click the dash icon. Then you click the application dash at the bottom. Then you have to click on "more applications" to see your full list. I don't care to see what applications are available from software center. I also don't care about my recent applications. I don't see the point of recent applications being here when they're already under the first menu prior to clicking the applications lens to begin with. I have tolerated these shortcomings since I have always been a big fan of the super key + type-to-find-application combo. While I will say that Unity in the 13.04 beta is very fast, Gnome Shell's current implementation is absolutely faster than Unity in 12.04. I also like the simplified look of Gnome Shell. It seems to offer a ton of flexibility with the use of extensions while keeping a simple, streamlined interface. I found an array of extensions I swear by. Currently I have my sent/receive network traffic being continuously displayed in the upper bar. I also have a media player extension which allows me to switch tracks without even opening Clementine. Sure, Unity has this, but Gnome Shell's layout just feels cleaner and more streamlined. I'm also a big fan of the "dash to dock" extension, which presents the left bar found in the activities menu to be present all of the time without having to hot corner. There's also a "dock" extension, which is the same thing but looks slightly slightly different and is justified on the right side of the screen. Both of them very usable if you don't like having to hot corner to see your bar of application icons. There's also no denying that Gnome Shell's dash menu is exponentially simpler to use, however I do like how Unity's dash can search for individual files. That came in handy at times, however having to continuously hit "show more" was irritating. I guess the show files thing in Unity is like a +1 with a deducation of .5 all at once.
While I have my frustrations with Gnome Shell (only listing suspend in the menu unless you hold ALT to see restart/shutdown - really guys?), I do like how it's consistent with each version. Each and every time I can see exactly what I need and bam - I know where it's at. With Unity, each version reorganizes things a little bit. I remember going into 13.04 and seeing a different selection of options within the upper-right menu. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but I would prefer to see a select set of options last instead of seeing them get rearranged with each 6 month release.
If I had to boil down my last remaining thoughts surrounding the "big 3" desktop environments, namely Gnome Shell, KDE, and Unity, this would be my overall synopsis.
Unity - Out of the box it's rather easy to use. It's an environment grandma could get used to, but after some degree of tinkering as the dash menu can offer too much information in too little space. I like Unity because from the get-go it doesn't feel as though it needs a solid amount of tinkering to get off the ground. That said, tinkering in general with Unity is a bit of a lost cause right now, but I'm sure Canonical will change that in the future. An add-on tool I found (the name slips my mind) for 13.04 offered a considerable amount of flexibility, however it just manipulates the way Unity looks/feels, whereas Gnome Shell offers extensions that can wildly change or alter the behavior of the entire system. THIS is the type of customizability I think Unity needs to go for. Tools that help change the icons and colors of the Unity bar only go so far.
KDE - Out of the box, KDE is rather boring to me. I will admit I'm not a huge fan of the bottom-justified panel oriented environments. Even on Windows, I found myself moving the bar to the left or top side of the panel. It just felt more natural to me. KDE often feels like a guard dog that will get distracted by a simple tennis ball. That's not to slam KDE, I find KDE to be beautiful and amazing, and quite honestly it's been my main desktop environment lately, but sometimes I wonder why certain things are organized the way they are. That said, I do acknowledge they have a monumental amount of configurable options, easily the highest number of configurable options of any desktop environment I've used, so cataloging features and settings is far from easy. Despite the magnitude of customizability KDE brings to the table, there are certain things that I would like to see them dig deeper with. KDE is something that would be relatively usable by grandma out of the box, but not quite as easy to use as Unity or Gnome Shell, in my opinion. It's something I can see a power user using, or simply a user who's super headstrong about having 100% control with every element of their desktop environment. KDE 4.10 is fast, highly configurable, and undoubtedly kind of customization.
Gnome Shell - I was a one time hater, but now that it's matured a little but I'm really liking what I'm seeing as a whole. I still have minor frustrations with it. For example, why keep shut down and restart out of the menu... why? Maybe I don't want to suspend... ever think of that? Ironically enough I always, always suspend my machines, so it's really not a bother... I guess I'm just being vocal for other users who would prefer to have them visible. Also, I really like the idea of having the dock seen in the activities overlay as being available all of the time without needing to hot corner. Oh, wait! We're talking about Gnome Shell here! These things can be fixed by extensions! Annnnd that brings me to my next point. Gnome Shell offers a vast degree of customizable options via extensions (which by the way are super easy to install from their extensions home page found here - https://extensions.gnome.org/) while providing you with a super simple yet super powerful easy to use desktop. It's fast, flows nicely, offers some degree of eye candy that is pleasing, and the dash menu just makes sense. I don't need to click 6 times to find an application via mouse. I can hot corner, click once on applications, and scroll to what I need. That... makes sense.
In closing, all desktop environments have pros and cons. In the world of open source software, we are spoiled with endless options. Instead of participating in what seems to be never ending squabbles about which one is better, I think it's important to embrace the benefits of all desktop environments. These options do not exist in the Microsoft or Apple world. We are fortunate to have such flexibility. YOU are in control of your system. Nobody else. After all, when you order a lager and your buddy orders a light beer, do you squabble over that, or do you toast together for a good time? Bazinga.
Last edited:
