The main LMDE edition featuring MATE 1.2 as the default desktop and Cinnamon 1.4 as a secondary desktop. MATE will work with Compiz (also installed by default) and Cinnamon will work in Virtualbox, so you’ll be able to enjoy both desktops and see which one you like best.
It’s probable both of these desktops will eventually get their own separate editions going forward.
zerozero wrote:i can answer that one bim, i think, the same i miss, the overview and the search (and to a lesser extend the dynamic workspaces)
viking777 wrote:zerozero wrote:i can answer that one bim, i think, the same i miss, the overview and the search (and to a lesser extend the dynamic workspaces)
Yes, yes and no.
I have static the workspaces extension. But 100% for the other two. The other thing is I don't want a desktop menu, or desktop switchers or shortcuts on my panel any more the gnome-shell way is better.
viking777 wrote:If you have a look at this post:
And scan down to the Faq section, the last post here is in regard to new LMDE iso's. I was surprised and not a little disturbed to find out that according to that post the only desktops available in the new iso's will be Xfce, Mate and Cinnamon.
Is this a typo or a policy?
The way it reads to me is if you upgrade via up4 you can keep gnome-shell, but if you reinstall you can't.
Edit by Clem: You can actually install Cinnamon and run it without most of Gnome 3 or even Nautilus.. so technically we could make it more independent going forward, it just doesn’t really make sense right now to do so. Cinnamon handles the interface, the layer of the desktop you interact with.. except the background, desktop icons and the file browser which are handled by Nautilus. Going forward, it’s hard to say… it really depends on the direction taken by Gnome 3. At the moment Gnome 3 is a good base for Cinnamon and the resulting desktop is something we’re happy with. If tomorrow Gnome 3 lose critical features we need, or if they deviate in a way that only suits Gnome Shell we’d either use another desktop underneath Cinnamon, or we’d fork Gnome itself or we would make our own. Whatever happens we’ll always do what makes the most sense for us in terms of what we want to achieve and the quality we expect from the desktops we support/develop within Linux Mint.
viking777 wrote:But as I said, from my point of view although I have nothing against Cinnamon and would happily use it if gnome-shell didn't exist, I still find it (and any other desktop that you care to name) inferior to my customized shell. I then go on to reason that as Mint is not likely to be supporting my DE of choice and I don't use any of the Mint tools/customizations (in fact I usually have to work to get rid of some of them), why am I still running MInt? There is only one reason really - this forum.
so why mint? why lmde?
- it runs great. i tried several times debian proper, and it doesn't run better than my zz-tweaked lmde
(and maybe my install is not lmde anymore )
- these fora; i'm not registered in that many (actually just a couple) but there's names here and friends that i would like to keep in touch with;
- the mint project as a whole, Clem does an amazing job (even if that means that his priorities are going in a different way than mine).
...think it's enough (how i hate these moments )
tdockery97 wrote:Same sentiments as ZZ and GeneC above. Been running my own tweaked KDE version of LMDE a while now, pointed to Testing. Guess I'm not truly within support parameters anymore either. But it's nice to keep current on what is going on with the official Mints.
Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 2 guests