Gnome Shell beats Cinnamon and Unity in terms of beauty

[greywalk]

When I run Cinnamon (and Unity) I cannot get rid of the feeling that both the DEs are kind of outdated in terms of style. In short - they just look like XFCE - outdated. Gnome Shell leaves an impression of being stylish and modern, with all that transparency, neat borders and scroll, etc.. Yes, a bit mac-ish, to say so, but very aesthetically pleasant, at last able to compete with KDE in look. As soon as I install Cinnamon I change the default theme immediately as it's intolerably not stylish. I think the days of GTK2 look and feel should be gone.. I wonder what could be done to make Cinnamon look better?

P.S. Linux Mint Petra - is the most polished system I've ever run. No other I've tried is close to it in this regard and has ever been. So in terms of polish Mint rocks. But I do wish Cinnamon becomes more beautiful one day.

[RacerBG]

I agree partly but Cinnamon also have it's beauty. And remember that in terms of real desktop feeling Cinnamon beats both.

[MartyMint]

Some people want seizure-inducing flashing lights and whizzing smears...

...the rest of us just want an OS that gets out of the way so we can get real work done.


I don't need spinning cubes and throbbing transparencies to compare spreadsheets or monitor top info in an open terminal.

[jungle_boy]

Yes, gnome shell is more beautiful than cinnamon.

[exploder]

How good any given OS looks is pretty subjective, everyone has their own tastes. I used Gnome Shell in Fedora for a few months and I thought it looked fine, at the time though a lot of features were missing though. Gnome Shell continues to improve just like all the rest. I do not feel that any desktop environment really gets in my way though, they all have their good points. Everyone is trying to come up with fresh new ideas and it is advancing Linux adaption on all kinds of devices.

As far as Unity goes, I have watched usability tests between Unity and Gnome 2x and the people using Unity actually completed things much quicker. Unity takes a little getting used to but many of the ideas used in it are very good. Cinnamon is designed for desktop use, including laptops of course. Clem and the other developers have done a fine job of keeping the traditional desktop layout while giving it a modern, elegant look and feel. Cinnamon is a mix of the old and new so to speak.

People are always going to find something to complain about, it has always been that way but that is why we have all of the choices we have. Enjoy your choices but try to keep an open mind about how and why things are changing.

[Condorman]

Have to say I'm a massive fan of Gnome Shell too. Using it right now in fact. I'm not sure I could say with any honesty that it beats Cinnamon in terms of beauty (it's very easy to make Cinnamon very pretty indeed), but boy not only is it gorgeous but it's really nice to use too.

I still have Mint 16 Cinnamon as my main desktop, and I don't intend to change that any time soon. But Gnome Shell is a massively underrated and misunderstood desktop imho. Hopefully its time will come and people will wake up to it.

[jungle_boy]

Yes, gnome shell is more beautiful than cinnamon; I use LM14 with cinnamon, with proprietary graphic card driver, working fine, however, if I use gnome shell on cinnamon LM14, after installing the proprietary driver, the window breaks.

I'll wait LM17 to try use gnome shell again.

[fraxinus_63]

When I run Cinnamon (and Unity) I cannot get rid of the feeling that both the DEs are kind of outdated in terms of style. In short - they just look like XFCE - outdated. Gnome Shell leaves an impression of being stylish and modern, with all that transparency, neat borders and scroll, etc..

I guess we all have different priorities and interests.

I use a large monitor; because I am working in publishing/graphics/editing, I always need to lots of programmes and windows running concurrently, so the "distraction-free" model of computer use upon which Gnome 3 is apparently based is never going to work for me. The traditional desktop metaphor of CInnamon, MATE and XFCE may look "outdated" to some users, but with my own workflow it works extremely well. I'm eternally grateful to Mint for continuing to support it as wholeheartedly as they do.

[MartyMint]

I always need to lots of programmes and windows running concurrently, so the "distraction-free" model of computer use upon which Gnome 3 is apparently based is never going to work for me.

Nailed it.


Please don't full-screen my apps, or crowd out my open windows.

Try demuxing .TS video with ProjectX , with an instance of GIMP open while viewing a YouTube tutorial on Unity or Gnome. You'll want to throw yourself off a bridge.

[Orbmiser]

Yep saw the review of latest Gnome on LAS and beginning to see some of their fruition come to light.
And yes it's beautiful. I do place high degree of importance on aesthetics on a desktop and prefer minimalism over the Giant Conky's,Widgets,Icons on the desktops. For me I have two shruken down panels in lower left corner that are always on screen and gives me immediate access to menu,apps,sound,wifi,time and weather. And one Conky script that gives me Date & Time at a glance with ram,wifi,cpu loads always visible. The rest is for open apps and using. Not to stare at like a painting.

I do not like apps to full screen mode or tilting. As inevitable that it gets in the way of other apps I'm using at the same time. And don't like shuffling windows when I can have apps Sized and Position they way I like them on dual displays spanning 4 virtual desktops. And just a mouse wheel turn takes me to the desktop I need at the moment.

KDE is the only DE that I found that fits all those needs. Gnome not so much. As lacks Apps remembering their Size & Position.
Also the requirement of 3rd party extensions gives me hesitations about functioning after each upgrade or individual abandons it down the line. Also the heavy integration of social media is not my cup of tea.

Considering their past fiasco's of removing features and their tendency to ignore users feedback unless it's align with their vision.
Leaves me looking else where. And wish them success and progress reaching their goal and it fulfills many user's need in a DE.

But as Beauty is only skin deep.
For me under the skin things like native flexibility,features and function trumps Beauty every time for me and my needs.
.

[altair4]

Some people want seizure-inducing flashing lights and whizzing smears...
...the rest of us just want an OS that gets out of the way so we can get real work done.
I don't need spinning cubes and throbbing transparencies to compare spreadsheets or monitor top info in an open terminal.

Please don't full-screen my apps, or crowd out my open windows.
Try demuxing .TS video with ProjectX , with an instance of GIMP open while viewing a YouTube tutorial on Unity or Gnome. You'll want to throw yourself off a bridge.

It's probably because I seem to find myself agreeing with most of your posts in this forum but I'm beginning to get a real appreciation for your ... um ... writing style

[InkKnife]

The two main Mint Desktops, Cinnamon and MATE are fundamentally conservative designs that aim for a certain understated elegance, not a gaudy full screen display.
I find Gnome3 to be way, way too up in my face. I find Cinnamon to be a more peaceful companion.

[Condorman]

The two main Mint Desktops, Cinnamon and MATE are fundamentally conservative designs that aim for a certain understated elegance, not a gaudy full screen display.
I find Gnome3 to be way, way too up in my face. I find Cinnamon to be a more peaceful companion.

I think this sums it up for me too. I use Cinnamon with a top panel and a simple Cairo Dock at the bottom, and to me it is much nicer to use than Gnome 3 (even though I admit I love Gnome 3). What I get with my setup is something that looks modern and fresh with sexy and useful desktop effects like workspaces, but also as you say a more peaceful desktop which is easier to navigate and gets out of my face.

I simply can't imagine using anything else now.