I'm not really that surprised. Unity was a good idea, but it was made for a scenario that Linux is ill-suited for. The vast majority of people do not want to spend all their time tinkering with their computers - and quite often have enough difficulty as it is maintaining a basic Windows installation. There's simply too much fragmentation in the Linux ecosystem, and Unity was just yet another fragment.

 

So you do use Unity from week to week when you install a new OS?

 

Wut? O.o Was I one of the few to actually like how Unity looked? Oh well. I currently use the MATE desktop anyway.

Sent from my cave of despair where I collect souls

 

As much as they tried to make it one in later years, Unity never really worked as a DE for home computing devices. Ubuntu put all its chips into touchscreens becoming the new normal across computing, and it backfired.

That said, I've got no particular love for GNOME Shell. But investing in a new replacement would be ridiculous, and it's not like they can abandon GTK3 or admit that the Cinnamon or MATE teams had the right idea.

 

5+ years of work down the drain. Granted, GNOME 3 was a disaster when it started; I've heard it's much better now, but AFAIK it's still missing some basics like the Minimize button.

Mir, on the other hand, was a solution in search of a problem. Wayland's already in use on some systems and is supported by more companies.

 

MATE ftw.

 

I too liked Unity's look.
I still hate the look and feel of GNOME3. It looks both bland and over complicated at the same time. It reminds of why I hated Windows 8.

 

That's what happens when you put philosophy over practicality.

 

I keep going back to MATE and wanting to love it like I did GNOME2. But I just end up using something like XFCE4 or Budgie instead

 

XFCE4 stock looks like a completely dated pile of shit. But once you really work on it, you can get something pretty awesome. It's really one the most flexible DEs for Linux.