• Buffalox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Yes that is true, but there was no similar breakage, everything KDE 3 and KDE 4 mixed well with other desktops, and mostly followed established standards for the Linux desktop.
    The KDE team never showed similar arrogance to the Gnome team either, and KDE didn’t remove beloved basic functionality because obscure “reasons” like Gnome did.
    Also KDE was not nearly as significant to the Linux environment as Gnome was.
    Finally that is whataboutism and not a valid argument to the debate that what Gnome did was extremely harmful to Linux as a whole.

    • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      It’s not whataboutism, it’s personal experience. I used Slackware mostly after switching, so no Gnome.

      About significance - you might be mixing up Gnome 2 to Gnome 3 transition with GTK2 to GTK3 transition.

      GTK3 I hated with passion, oh yes. I literally built GTK programs from source if the repo version was GTK3 and GTK2 was supported for some time period, later got too lazy to do that.

      Still, the inconvenience of needing a whole theme instead of one ~/.gtkrc-2.0 file .