Cinnamon proposed to replace GNOME Shell as default DE on Fedora 19

Cinnamon is not going to replace GNOME Shell as the default desktop environment in Fedora. It's just not going to happen -- Red Hat is probably the biggest supporter of GNOME.

But Cinnamon IS GNOME 3, it's just a different UI

As a KDE user, it is six of one and half a dozen of the other.

Is it really going to make a difference for Fedora or its users?

@ Steven_Rosenber

Never say never. Adolf Hitler had some major supporters too!

I know that some people in the Fedora community bristle if you insinuate that Red Hat directs the project, but come on Red Hat would not allow this.

Red Hat for better or worse supports GNOME, its developers, and the course they are on. I have to believe that Red Hat sees GNOME's direction as the base of a mobile/small form factor strategy in the near future.

On a sort of related note why is it that KDE can't seem to benefit more from the GNOME disatisfaction? All of these forks of GNOME to make it more like a traditional desktop seem redundant to what KDE offers.

Too many people think KDE is a resource hog, perhaps.

GNOME 3 consumes more resources than KDE 4.x.

I agree Caitlyn, GNOME is often more resource intensive than KDE.

Still don't understand why people want to fork GNOME and Nautilus with KDE and Dolphin being right there waiting to be used.

Still don't understand why people want to fork GNOME and Nautilus with KDE and Dolphin being right there waiting to be used.

Maybe because of the look and feel of a GTK system? When you enter the Qt world, things have a distinctly different look and feel. It's not bad, it works just as well, but just maybe it doesn't tickle GTK users fancy?

For what it's worth, I don't have a problem with Gnome 3. I have a very strong dislike of Gnome Shell's workflow. I'm using Cinnamon. A desktop that is a direct descendant from Gnome Shell, but with a more traditional workflow and I get a long fine with it. So my dislike for Gnome Shell is not based on the underlying technology, but on the completely idiotic arrangement of it's components.

I pretty much agree with everything r_a_trip wrote here. Mind you, I like the look of the KDE Plasma desktop but it is different. It also is very customizable. Just see how different ROSA is from openSUSE, for example, in terms of their default desktop. I also agree there is nothing inherently wrong with the GTK3 libraries or the underlying GNOME3 code. It's the way the shell is designed that just seems cumbersome to me.

I find that GNOME Shell isn't as resource intensive as you might think. When you're doing a 3-D operation, it takes a chunk of CPU, but once the operation is over it gives that CPU back. It's not a constant drain on CPU at all.