> I’m not sure how the love for GNOME continues
Because KDE looks and feels straight out of 2010 compared to GNOME? GNOME just suffers by leaving some (what should be integrated) features to its shitty extension system.
Because KDE looks and feels straight out of 2010 compared to GNOME? GNOME just suffers by leaving some (what should be integrated) features to its shitty extension system.
Can you name a UI/UX improvement in desktop design (that KDE doesn't have) since 2010 to warrant this being a negative?
To be honest, I wish the GNOME team completely halted development and exclusively focused on bug fixing for at least a year. For example, Nautilus sometimes leaks memory and get killed by the kernel.
Neither GNOME nor KDE are perfect. We could list out bugs in both for days and still not be done. But they are both usable, and have divergent design that gives users a meaningful choice between which desktop they prefer. They both have strong ideological underpinnings that ignore weaknesses in their tech stack to drive progress forward at any cost. It's not the end of the world for either desktop. Both projects have been plugging away for decades without issue.
You still didn’t answer any question I posed about UX though, since that was what we were talking about and I have levied specific criticisms.
What other questions are there to answer? GNOME is benign, there's a reason why it's the default in mainstream distros like Ubuntu and Fedora.