Why does Jow Forums hates gnome?

Why does Jow Forums hates gnome?
It has improved over the years and i like it more than mate or kde because it looks simple

Attached: gnome.jpg (1280x720, 63K)

tablet-tier interface
second gnome shell just for gdm
single-threaded garbage everywhere
animations are not smooth
capped to 60 fps (literally hardcoded lol)
mouse stuttering, lock-ups, and general lag
very bad scaling
generally a ramhog for no good reason and runs like shit even on modern computers

a lot of these issues have been known for years and still aren't fixed. Gnome devs will arrogantly ignore them and pretend they know better than the userbase. literally any DE is better than this poorly coded monstrosity
>inb4 works on my machine
well, good for you, but a large amount of people have horrid issuss which is why it's such a polarizing DE.

imo
>the good
it has the right idea
moving the mouse to a panel [usually on the bottom] to click a task[window] and then moving it back up is tiresome and archaic and really doesn't werk well if you do it a lot
>the bad
it's can be restricting
the wayland port has some overhead [compared to weston]
bugs aren't fixed for years
instead version bumps are surface changes
spend their money on sjwism instead of programming

found out for me openbox meta+mouse click for the windows list is even easier than gnome's overview

>gnome 3.x
More bloat, less features
Least usable DE

Because Gnome doesn't match what I want - a lightweight DE that looks nice with little configuring and gives me as much control as possible if I want it. Xfce fills that role now, though admittedly I've been considering ditching some RAM for Cinnamon lately

This.

3.30 on wayland is p smooth for me
Didnt know about the 60hz cap thats bad

Jow Forums hate more Gnome's devs than Gnome itself

Attached: 1514344534604.png (678x757, 55K)

mccan probably has autism
I kinda agree with the devs tho I mean message popups can be useful but duplicating the app icon in a special status area is pretty bad design if you think about it

I am 100% sure that the GNOME dev knew what the XFCE is project. He simply was buthurt at the reatard who called a GTK2 app a "XFCE app".

>try to compress something
>opposite buttons to prevent your fat fingers to push the wrong one
>no one use touch screens in desktop computers
>instead you must move your mouse unnecessarily
And that's only talking about compression, there are a lot of tablet inspired shit in that desktop.
You must be kidding, gnome is a pain in the ass to use with a mouse.

Attached: 1536747599779.jpg (266x280, 21K)

i dont think gnome is meant for tablets, the app grid is comfy imo, it's just a bitch to create folders there

I don't think so isn't a reason. I just give you an example why it is a tablet GUI.
I can give you more examples about it (lock screen, suspension, settings) besides a tablet interface it's a nice wm but a bloated one.

Attached: 1536644545888.jpg (1280x720, 100K)

>lock screen
space
>suspension
is just retarted but not tablet
>settings
?

Gnome is fully colonized by Pajeets, Heebs, Trannies, and combinations thereof.

Based, I too was switching back and forth between MATE and Cinnamon as alternatives to XFCE, but I never left. It's old and has very few features, but I value a DE that does not make so many compromises

Space? What do you mean? A workaround for the problem they made?
>It's just retarded but not tablet
But it's just like a phone/tablet...
>?
Will you ignore everything? Big separated buttons everywhere, widely spaced options, toggle switch everywhere, etc. It's clearly intended to use with your fingers.
I don't even know why I try to discuss this with you.

hit space and it will go up
no need to mouse drag
>Big separated buttons everywhere, widely spaced options, toggle switch everywhere, etc. It's clearly intended to use with your fingers.
maybe but then again gnome's touch support is crappy afaik
so that makes those just design which i don't mind it at all, for example buttons are much easier to press - i don't have to struggle to aim the pointer over it as with a wm like openbox
>muh big titles
>muh wasted pixels
usually doesn't matter or there's the application has a fullscreen key if it does
and again i myself like them much better than tiny thin titles, much comfier

>or there's the
or the

>It doesn't matter
>It doesn't matter
>I prefer to waste spaces
t. gnome dev
Well, thanks for the reply. I won't waste more time in this thread.

Attached: 1536537302037.jpg (153x255, 15K)

>10pixels
>waste spaces

>t. gnome dev
im not gay tho
btw different themes have diff sizes but gnome might remove 3rd party themes

Simple
Gnome:
>Fullscreen 2D games lag and slowdown
KDE:
>Fullscreen 2D games rmun smooth as butter
I don't need to know more to know which one is better, kde even has window rules and all that advanced shit while gnome has slow as fuck music player in python. Fuck that.

>it's just 10 pixels

Multiply that everywhere and soon we're wasting thousands of pixels.

>does [...] hates
Fuck off, spic.

>kde even has window rules and all that advanced shit
GNOME doesn't have features like these because the developers believe it would be "confusing" and "unintuitive" to users. GNOME is literally the Apple of Lincuck DEs.

how

Yeah i noticed that when the transparent visualizer meme comes up every now and then. Gnome users posting screenshots of cava running in a slow terminal that gets treated as a fucking window. Holy shit, i could force that shit as background widget under a blurred transparent taskbar since ten years. Talk about backward.

>copy something to or from the desktop
>no progress bar because GNOME devs hate the idea of placing files on the desktop