What I like:

• I like GNOME 40 more than GNOME 3 because it's prettier.
• I like GNOME in general because it's stable with pretty, high quality bundled programs.
• I like the UX. It takes all the good things about the macOS UX and makes them better, while taking all the bad things and making them less stupid.
• I like that they completely separate the dock from normal window management, so I never hit it when my cursor reaches the edge of the screen.
• I like that you can set Nautilus to use one-click to open folders, even though that is cribbed from Dolphin. (Even if I use lf most of the time)
• I like the simple IBus integration that lets me setup my Japanese IME easily.

What I dislike:

• I dislike that I need a system tray extension for some software.
• I dislike how in-your-face the notifications are and that they can't be stacked.
• I dislike that I need to use Dconf to set shortcuts for workspaces 5-10.
• I dislike needing GNOME Tweaks to set autostart software/daemons—this is a basic feature, not a "tweak".
• I dislike not having an easy way to port my settings for GNOME to a new computer. It's annoying to have to set all this stuff up again compared to Sway, where I clone a repository and copy some config files over.
• I dislike the new screenshot tool in GNOME 40+. It automatically saves photos to a directory, rather than letting me copy it. Come to think of it, I also dislike that it doesn't support the same screenshot protocols Sway does for grim and slurp, which is my favorite screenshot workflow.

I like GNOME but there's something so frustrating about how much it's lacking out of the box. It feels like you have to fish out a lot of extensions to make it comfortable to use, and these extensions often break each update. Not having native support for a taskbar to quickly show/minimize the apps you have open... Just why?

Luckily a lot of distros do add those features out of the box like Zorin/Nobara, but otherwise I'd just go for Plasma. A lot of Gnome feels like it's copying Mac for the sake of copying Mac which I don't like very much, but maybe I'm biased because I mostly use and got comfortable with Windows-style UI. People compared it to Windows 8 and I totally agree, the way they want you to use Gnome feels more like it's made for tablets than desktops.

Gnome is pretty good otherwise, it's just their team makes weird decisions and never seem to change their stance.

I admire their uncompromising stance on feature creep and polish of the core functionality.

I'm a simple man, all I need 95% of the time is keyboard shortcuts to switch between maximized browser and a maximized terminal emulator.

Compare and contrast KDE, where you have three infinitely configurable screen zoom plugins, and I've never seen 3/3 working.

I like GNOME because I don't want customizability.

OK, I like a bit of customizability, but I'm not a designer and trying to make things look consistent and nice is a pain. I once spent days making an icon theme work in Xfce (the freedesktop standards for naming icons are not followed by anyone... (meaning both Xfce and icon themes))

I use GNOME as is and accept it and everything is swell.

Also I use a laptop and I'm addicted the three-finger swipe window preview...

Coming from Windows, gnome was the desktop that taught me how to use and appreciate multiple workspaces. I'm now entirely sold on KDE, but there's something to be said about the gnome workflow.

I use a vanilla Gnome without extensions - Arch Linux.

• clean desktop
• I don't want distraction desktop with tons of infos....app like NextCloud must running without infos about syn etc.
• for productivity need clean and optimal desktop with tiling windows
• 3 or 4 working desktops
• and keyboard shortcuts

Most important for me, less blotware, functional, clean and minimal distraction - minimalist desktop.

GNOME is opinionated and beautiful. Lots of focus on reasonable design instead of massive amount of customization. It also has a great app ecosystem and documentation. I love it.

I use vanilla gnome. Dead simple, no nonsense, gets out of my way. Perfect DE for me.

I ran Pop! OS for about a day which uses Gnome (don't know which version) and while I liked bits of it I really disliked the file browser and image viewer. The file browser makes it difficult to browse folders outside of my home folder, there are no image previews and there's a needlessly large gap between folders and files wasting visual space. The image viewer is not great, it can't open the images made by my Nikon DSLR and quite a few times the image viewer would load the image at full resolution putting the title bar off the top of the monitor.

gnome 40+ has a great workflow
coming from windows 10, it was different at first but now it feels just natural

I like Gnome Shell. It's polished and extensible. Libadwaita and the header bars are nice as well. I generally prefer nautilus to dolphin, even if I hate having to ctrl-l to edit the path.

I use KDE however because Mutter is still dogshit slow, especially in wayland. My work PC has a R5 3600, RX 570, and 48GB ram and it struggles to maintain 60fps across 3 1080p monitors. KWin runs significantly better, so I use KDE and just configure it like I would Gnome.

I hate the giant app menu thing where everything is massive and clearly designed to accommodate a touch interface, so I've never used it much beyond that. I am on a desktop, not a mobile device, why is it designed like a mobile device? It's the same thing people hated about Windows 8, why the hell would you follow that design philosophy?? I really don't get it.

I understand you can use extensions and whatnot to change that, but why would I want to fight with it when other DE's are already designed for a desktop experience? Gnome is just flat out not for me.

I like a lot of pre-customised versions of GNOME like with Ubuntu or Pop!_OS but (and I'm currently using this on Fedora) the default "out of the box" GNOME experience is a bit rough and unfriendly. Sure I've got it customised now with some fancy top panel stuff but its still clear I just shoehorned in a bunch of GNOME extensions - and I'm still yet to find a tray that is 1) still supported and 2) to my liking.

Mostly like. Big negatives list:

• constantly breaks extension compatibility
• actively hostile towards tiling
• forced horizontal workspaces
• fails miserably if dri doesn't work 100%
• changes configuration systems like socks
• output/logs noisy and not useful

What I hate is CSD.. using it with CSD is sad for #xfce user :'(

I can never stick with gnome/gtk because it’s been impossible for me to get a consistent theme/look across my apps.

Newer gnome/gtk has its DPI jacked so that the title bar, buttons, etc. are far too huge for my desktop or laptop, with the only fix being to tinker with the theme config files. Older gnome apps don’t have this issue, but their themes are incompatible so good luck finding a matching theme pair. Non-GTK apps would get stuck with the newer title bar — I swear it would be >100px tall. And doesn’t gnome/gtk 4 have an even newer theme interface that’s incompatible with 2/3?

I’ve since moved to openbox and tiling managers; they actually bother to get this right.

gnome 4 is fine. i come from macs and chromebooks, so a minimalist desktop with an app dock is familiar. KDE, XFDE, etc are too windows-y for me.

The only reasons i stopped using gnome is the lack of system tray and the window switching workflow when using a mouse.

I like the overall design of the Gnome Shell (top panel) and the workflow with different workspace. I like it so much that I actually copied it in KDE. What I don't like is the look and feel of GTK apps. They're often so limited or the advanced options aren't clear at the first look.

I use gnome 4 because it is the most "out of the way" DE. I disable the dock and use an extension to hide the top bar, so there is literally nothing on my screen but the program(s) I'm using. I haven't found another DE that let's me do that (hiding the dock/taskbar doesnt count, cause it still comes up when you get the mouse too close which is super annoying).

I also like the window presenter thing, which I first started using with KDE. I prefer gnome's implementation though, since it is the same key to bring up the window selector and the app launcher. I often want to switch to a window only to find it isn't open, or I want to open a program that already is open but hidden behind other windows, so it makes sense to put them together. I also can't be bothered to learn more than one hotkey. I've tried to obtain this overall behavior in KDE, but I found it was a whole lot of configuration just to get what gnome already does, so I might as well just use gnome.

I found the "touchscreen-y" interface bothersome at first, but I've gotten used to it. The biggest issue is not showing a large number of app entries efficiently, but it's pretty trivial to remove the entries you don't actually need with alacarte.

Gnome's default apps (like the newish gnome text editor) are getting too simplistic for my preference, but again it's super easy to swap them out.

I remember my first time installing Ubuntu as a teenager and the fact that the desktop environment was Gnome made me hate it. At that age and time I wanted something familiar and Windows-like. Since then, 13 years ago, I always hated Gnome (and Ubuntu) and I don't feel like that is going to change any time soon.

The new SteamOS opened my eyes to KDE Plasma and now I am running Garuda on my main desktop. Eventually I plan to switch to Arch and "make my own distro" or just use SteamOS once it gets official desktop release.

Using it because it's the least buggy DE i've tried so far. With a few extensions the workflow isn't too bad either.

I love the design of the applications in general tho, in the sense that they do one thing and one thing only and there aren't a billion options trying to cover every use case without doing any of them well.

i like the consistency, smoothness, ease of use and customizability of gnome. you can find an extension for anything. however, the stock layout is pretty barebones. it forces you to learn to use it the way the developer team intended. it's great that the team has a clear vision of what they want gnome to be, but for me personally, it lacks some things that i'm used to from years of using windows.

I don't use it on the desktop, but it's a pretty great interface on the Pinetab 2 I have. It simply behaves very well with touch input. One annoyance I have though is not having a "right click" with the touchpad built into the keyboard case. I need to use two fingers in Gnome. It's not annoying enough to where I absolutely need to change it though.

I like the aesthetic, Gnome applications are very pretty. But I really don't like the workflow, it's not objectively bad but I already have my own and I refuse to change it. The desktop should adapt to my choices, not the other way around. I know you can change how Gnome behaves with extensions but I believe that kinda defeats the whole point, and I've heard they often break.

I prefer Xfce; it's simple but not too minimalistic, it's customazible but not so much to give you choice paralysis, and it just lets you run things however you want without getting in the way.

I tend to prefer KDE because I'm a tinkerer, but I don't hate GNOME or anything. I think it's good for someone who wants the UI to just work and generally get out of the way without much fiddling, although last time I tried it I did find it needed a few extensions to add some basic stuff for whatever reason.

But ultimately, I think it's good to have choices for both sides of the spectrum, that's kind of what FOSS is all about in the end.

Ir was my first desktop I encountered when introduced to GNU/Linux and it is actually what made me delay my switch to GNU/Linux since I disliked it so much. back then I did not know there are more desktop options so Iit made me think the whole GNU/Linux is not interesting to me. It was not until a few years later until I was told there are other options and I was shown KDE desktop (not called Plasma yet back then) that I fell in love with GNU/Linux.

Why I did not like GNOME was that it was too limited and limiting and unconfigurable. And I would say nowadays it has gotten even worse while KDE Plasma has improved a lot. I think GNU/Linux would have a lot more success at capturing the desktop OS market if KDE Plasma would be the major and default desktop in all those enterprise distributions. It is just so much better and so flexible you can even turn it to mimic any other desktop or even better customize it to fit your wery own best way of workflow and using computers.

I'm hopelessly addicted to Fluxbox still. I can configure the shit out of it with simple config files, and it's just out of the way. Almost don't have a system UI at all. In fact, if I didn't need a sliver of screen for my clock and battery indicator, I'd get rid of the taskbar.

Hoping to move to something modern that runs on Wayland some day, but I haven't found something suitable yet.

@TerryTPlatypus I've been an #xfce user my whole Linux journey, and ompared to xfce it's missing some features that I regularly use on xfce. It also uses way more resources & requires some extensions to better it for daily use....

I use GNOME 43 on Debian 12. I sincerely enjoy it. The workspaces are intuitive, it looks and feels sexy, and it has a pretty great set of extensions. While I really appreciate other projects like KDE and XFCE, I think GNOME is probably the most mature DE I've used.

That said, I do have a few gripes. For starters, it's pretty annoying that I have to use tweaks to access settings that should absolutely be included in the regular settings page. It's also pretty dumb that I have to install an extension to be able to quarter tile. There are so e other small issues I have, but none more than I would have with any other desktop experience, and overall I adore what the devs have put together.

I use i3wm, and any time I launch a gtk4 app, it takes way too long to load. 🥱 So I don't care for gnome4. 😅